Can a law firm pay a non-lawyer lobbyist based on the fees the firm collects from clients the lobbyist refers?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 2001. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current rules of professional conduct in your state, with citations.
Plain-English summary
A law firm wished to hire a non-lawyer lobbyist with an office in Washington, D.C., and to compensate that individual under a plan based in part on the fees the firm collected from clients the lobbyist referred.
The committee concluded that RPC 5.4 prohibits lawyers from sharing legal fees with non-lawyers, and that RPC 7.2 prevents a lawyer from paying referral fees for channeling professional work. It stated that any profit-sharing arrangement including non-lawyers must be based on the firm's overall profits and not on a particular referral.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 2001, 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 firm tie a non-lawyer's pay to fees from clients that person refers?
A: No. The committee concluded that RPC 5.4 bars sharing legal fees with non-lawyers and RPC 7.2 bars paying referral fees for channeling professional work.
Q: Is there any permissible way to share firm profits with a non-lawyer employee?
A: The committee said any profit-sharing arrangement that includes non-lawyers must be based on the firm's overall profits, not on a particular referral.
Background and rules framework
The opinion applies Washington RPC 5.4 (professional independence of a lawyer; the bar on sharing legal fees with non-lawyers; corresponding to Model Rule 5.4) and RPC 7.2 (advertising; the limits on paying others for referrals; Model Rule 7.2). The committee read the two together to bar compensating a non-lawyer based on fees from referred clients, while allowing profit-sharing tied to the firm's overall profits. The opinion reflects Washington's pre-2006 rule numbering.
Citations and references
Rules of Professional Conduct:
- Model Rule 5.4 / Washington RPC 5.4 (professional independence; sharing fees with a non-lawyer)
- Model Rule 7.2 / Washington RPC 7.2 (advertising; paying others for referrals)
See also
- WSBA Ethics Op. 1947: For-Profit Lawyer-List Website
- WSBA Ethics Op. 1511: Division of Fees With a Lawyer Referral Service
- WSBA Ethics Op. 1297: Lawyer in a Paid Referral Package
Source
- Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=1191
Original opinion text
Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.
Advisory Opinion: 1951
Year Issued: 2001
RPC(s): RPC 5.4; 7.2
Subject: Compensation for a law firm's non-lawyer lobbyist
The inquirer wrote that his law firm wished to hire a non-lawyer lobbyist who has an office in Washington, D.C. The firm would like to compensate this individual with a compensation plan based in part on fees the firm collects from clients referred by this individual.
The committee opined that RPC 5.4 prohibits lawyers from sharing legal fees with non-lawyers. In addition, RPC 7.2 prevents a lawyer form paying referral fees for channeling professional work. Any profit sharing arrangement that includes non-lawyers must be based on the firm’s over-all profits and not on a particular referral.
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read a 2001 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.