Obtaining a Confession of Judgment to Secure a
Fee
Opinion rules that prior to rendering legal
services to a client, a lawyer may not obtain a confession of judgment from a
client to secure a fee.
Inquiry #1:
Attorney A charges a flat fee for representation in certain
criminal and domestic matters. Prior to rendering legal services, he requires
the client to sign a confession of judgment, pursuant to G.S. §1A-1, Rule 68.
On occasion, the confession of judgment recites the amount of the flat rate fee
Attorney A has quoted to the client and, on occasion the confession of judgment
is blank as to the amount. Regardless of the extent of the services actually
rendered to the client, if the client fails to pay the fee, Attorney A files
the confession of judgment with the clerk of court. If the confession is blank,
he fills in the amount of the flat fee quoted to the client.
Attorney A agrees to represent Client X on the defense of a
felony. He tells Client X he will represent him for a flat fee of $2000 which
Client X must pay by the conclusion of the representation. Prior to rendering
services to Client X, Attorney A obtains Client X's signature on a confession
of judgment for $2000. Attorney A makes one minor court appearance on behalf of
Client X but, before rendering any other services to Client X, the district
attorney dismisses the charges on her own initiative due to insufficient
evidence. Client X has made no payments to Attorney A. Attorney A files the
confession of judgment with clerk of court and proceeds to enforce the
judgment. Client X disputes the amount of the fee. Is Attorney A's fee
arrangement with Client X ethical?
Opinion #1:
No, a lawyer may not obtain a confession of judgment from a client
prior to the rendering of legal services to the client. CPR 250, which was
adopted under the superseded Code of Professional Responsibility, allowed a
lawyer to obtain a confession of judgment from a client to secure a fee for
services. However, the practice of obtaining a confession of judgment prior to
the rendering of legal services to a client violates Rule 2.6 of the current
Rules of Professional Conduct. To the extent CPR 250 is inconsistent with this
opinion, it is overruled.
The State Bar's fee dispute arbitration program was established in
1993 in order to provide an appropriate and effective vehicle for resolving fee
disputes between a client and a lawyer. See "Professionalism
Report," NCSB Newsletter, Volume 17, No. 4, pages 8-14. Prior to
initiating legal proceedings to collect a disputed fee, a lawyer is required by
Rule 2.6(e) of the Rules of Professional Conduct to notify the client of the
existence of the State Bar's fee arbitration program and to participate in good
faith in nonbinding arbitration of the fee dispute if the client submits a
proper request for fee arbitration. Although a client who signed a confession
of judgment at the beginning of the representation may subsequently contest the
actual amount of the fee, a lawyer holding the confession of judgment appears
to have no duty to advise the client of the existence of the fee arbitration
program because the filing of a confession of judgment abrogates the need to
initiate legal proceedings to collect the fee. Moreover, with a confession of judgment
in hand, the lawyer has no motivation to resolve a fee dispute with the client
through arbitration because he or she already has a judgment. Attorney A's fee
arrangement frustrates the purpose of the State Bar's mandatory fee arbitration
program and is, therefore, in violation of Rule 2.6(e).
Attorney A's fee arrangement also violates Rule 2.6(a) which
prohibits a lawyer from entering into an agreement for, charging, or collecting
an excessive fee. Rule 2.6(b) lists the factors to be taken into consideration
in determining whether a fee is reasonable. These factors include the time and
labor required to perform the legal services. In the present inquiry, Attorney
A performed minimal services and the favorable outcome did not result from the
work of Attorney A. Therefore, the $2000 fee for the services is unreasonable.
In RPC 158, it is held that Rule 2.6(a) requires a lawyer to refund to the
client at the conclusion of the representation any portion of the fee which is
clearly excessive. If a confession of judgment is attained prior to the
rendering of legal services, it may be used unethically to collect an excessive
fee.
Inquiry #2:
Would opinion #1 be different if the confession of judgment was
signed by Client X in blank?
Opinion #2:
No.
Inquiry #3:
Attorney B has rendered legal services to Client Y. Client Y
indicates that he does not dispute the fee for the services rendered but he is
unable to pay the fee at this time. May Attorney B obtain a confession of
judgment from Client Y for the amount of the fee?
Opinion #3:
Yes, provided Attorney Y explains the confession of judgment to
the client. Since Client Y does not dispute the known fee, this arrangement
does not undermine the purpose of the fee arbitration program. See Rule
2.6(e).