Ethics Opinions

Print opinion

Back to ethics opinions search

RPC 148

January 15, 1993

Division of Fees

 

Opinion holds that a lawyer may not split a fee with another lawyer who does not practice in her law firm unless the division is based upon the work done by each lawyer or the client consents in writing, the fee is reasonable, and responsibility is joint.

 

Inquiry #1:

 

Attorney A and Attorney B do not practice in the same firm. Attorney A refers a case to Attorney B because the nature of the case involves matters not normally handled by Attorney A but within the area of practice of Attorney B (IRS estate tax matter). There is no written or oral agreement between the attorneys or with the client concerning a division of fees before, during, or after the relationship (there has never been any written or oral agreement of fee sharing between Attorney A and Attorney B in any past relationship); the client is not advised of any joint representation and the work is performed by Attorney B.

 

After a fee is received by Attorney B, Attorney A contacts Attorney B asking that one-third of the fee be shared with Attorney A in accordance with a practice which Attorney A has with other attorneys. Attorney B has not had any prior arrangement with Attorney A or any other attorney concerning such a fee splitting, and Attorney B is primarily concerned about the ethical implications of such a fee splitting arrangement given the following additional facts:

 

In the course of his representation, Attorney B had to make a disclosure to a government agency (IRS) concerning his fee which was signed under penalty of perjury. The disclosure was necessary in order to obtain a benefit (tax deduction) for his client. Attorney B is now concerned that any fee splitting arrangement entered into between the parties after a resolution of the case may jeopardize the estate's deduction previously obtained for the client. Attorney B has disclosed this to the client who has denied permission for a fee split because of the potential problems that such a reopening could have on the estate. Attorney A believes there is no ethical conflict with his receiving a one-third fee for his referral.

 

May Attorney B ethically fee split any portion of the fee with Attorney A?

 

Opinion #1:

 

Attorney B may not split any portion of the fee with Attorney A. Rule 2.6(d) provides that attorneys not in the same law firm may split fees only if the division is in proportion to the work done by each lawyer or if the client agrees to the division in writing, each lawyer assumes joint responsibility for the representation, and the total fee is reasonable. The inquiry makes it clear that Attorney A has not done any work on the matter and that the client has not agreed to the fee splitting arrangement. Consequently, a division of the fee would violate Rule 2.6(d). Additionally, it appears that, in light of the situation with the IRS, that any fee splitting arrangement might prejudice the client, in violation of Rule 7.1(a)(3).

 

Inquiry #2:

 

Would the answer to question 1 above be different if the additional facts above were not in existence?

 

Opinion #2:

 

No. The fee splitting proposal would still violate Rule 2.6(d).

 

Back to ethics opinions search

THE NORTH CAROLINA STATE BAR
217 E. Edenton Street • PO Box 25908 • Raleigh, NC 27611-5908 • 919.828.4620
Copyrightę North Carolina State Bar. All rights reserved.