WSBA 1993

Can a lawyer advance a client's litigation costs to pay for a medical examination or for medical treatment?

Short answer: The committee agreed RPC 1.8(e) is the governing rule, and noted that advancing costs for an examination would be permitted while advancing costs for treatment would be prohibited, but said it could not tell from the inquiry which the lawyer proposed.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1993. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current rules of professional conduct in your state, with citations.

Disclaimer: Advisory only. Not binding precedent.

About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official ethics opinion. The original opinion (linked on this page) is the authoritative source for any reliance.

Plain-English summary

A lawyer asked about advancing costs to a client. The committee agreed that the lawyer correctly identified the appropriate rule, RPC 1.8(e), but said it could not determine from the inquiry whether the proposal was to advance fees for an examination, which would be permitted, or for treatment, which would be prohibited.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1993, before the Washington State Bar Association's adoption of the 2006 revisions to the Rules of Professional Conduct. Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can a lawyer advance a client's costs for a medical examination?

A: The committee said advancing fees for an examination would be permitted under RPC 1.8(e).

Q: Can a lawyer advance a client's costs for medical treatment?

A: The committee said advancing fees for treatment would be prohibited.

Q: Why did the committee not give a definitive answer?

A: It said it could not determine from the inquiry whether the lawyer proposed to advance fees for an examination or for treatment.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied RPC 1.8(e) (corresponding to ABA Model Rule 1.8), which limits financial assistance to a client in connection with litigation to court costs and litigation expenses. The committee read examination costs as litigation expenses that may be advanced, but treatment costs as outside that permission.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

ABA Model Rule 1.8 (conflict of interest; financial assistance to a client); Washington RPC 1.8(e)

Source

Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=633

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

Advisory Opinion: 1552
Year Issued: 1993
RPC(s): RPC 1.8(e)
Subject: Advancing costs of litigation for treatment or examination

The Committee reviewed your inquiry concerning an issue of advancing costs to a client. The Committee agreed that you correctly identified the appropriate rule, RPC 1.8(e), but that it could not determine from your inquiry whether your proposal was to advance fees for examination, which would be permitted, or treatment which would be prohibited.

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 1993 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current rules of professional conduct in your state and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the rules it relies on.