Cases: Ethics

Ethics And Settlement Involving Fee Waivers: No Ethical Ramifications From Recommending Fee Waiver Settlements

Cases: Ethics, Cases: Settlement

State Bar’s Standing Committee Issues Formal Opinion Confirming Propriety of these Settlements.      Formal Opinion No. 2009-176 of the State Bar’s Standing Committee on Professional Responsibility and Conduct has concluded that (a) a lawyer does not violate any ethical obligation by recommending or conveying a fee-waiver settlement offer in a given case, and (2) a

Class Action: Class Representative Incentive Agreements That Created Conflicting Interests Required New Consideration Of Fee Award To Objectors And Class Counsel

Cases: Class Actions, Cases: Ethics

Ninth Circuit Requires Reexamination of Fee Denial to Objector’s Counsel and Fee Award to Class Counsel.      For the plaintiff class action practitioners out there which follow our blog, the next decision is must reading. Not only does it highlight the fiduciary and ethical duties involved in the process, but counsels that incentive agreements should

Out-of-State Attorneys: Don’t Despair—Ninth Circuit Holds You Can Get Paid As A Consultant Even Though You Are Not California Licensed Or Not Admitted Pro Hac Vice

Cases: Ethics, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

Holding Draws A Sharp Dissent; Opinion Also Discusses Lodestar and Sufficiency of Fee Substantiation.      The next case should spur the interest of non-California lawyers wishing to do limited consultation or limited co-counseling with California lawyers in California federal courts. Even if you are not licensed in California or do not obtain pro hac vice

Attorney’s Fee Ethics: Orange County Law Article Covers Wide Range Of Topics

Cases: Class Actions, Cases: Ethics, Cases: Liens for Attorney Fees, Cases: Retainer Agreements

February 2009 Article by Carole Buckner Covers Many Ethical Issues.      In the February 2009 edition of the Orange County Lawyer, Carole J. Buckner writes an article, “Ethics Opinions Provide Guidance in Resolving Attorneys’ Fee Issues,” covering a wide-ranging array of ethical issues relating to attorney’s fees.      Here is a synopsis of issues discussed

Ellen Peck’s January 2009 Article In California Bar Journal Has Nice Tips For Recovering Fees in Contingency, Limited Partner, Executor, and Client Fee Sharing Representations

Cases: Ethics, Cases: Probate, Cases: Quantum Meruit, Cases: Referral Agreements, Cases: Retainer Agreements, CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION

  Ms. Peck Reviews Stroud, Shimko, Miller, and Strong Decisions.      Ellen R. Peck, a former State Bar Court judge and Encino solo practitioner, has written a fine article in the January 2009 edition of the California Bar Journal with astute tips of upfront, prophylactic actions that can be taken for successfully recovering fees in

Sanctions: Attorney and Her Clients Sanctioned Under CCP Section 128.5 For Deliberately Revealing Trade Secret Despite Entry Into A Protective Arrangement

Cases: Ethics, Cases: Sanctions

Third District Affirms Sanctions Order of $43,678.42 Against Attorney and Her Clients.      Our fellow blawg “The Complex Litigator” has an excellent November 25, 2008 post on Wallis v. PHL Associates, Inc., Case No. C056200 (3d Dist. Nov. 25, 2008) (certified for publication). We will not review the facts in-depth, because “The Complex Litigator” post

Scroll to Top