Cases: Retainer Agreements

Client’s Informed Consent On Arbitration Clause Was Determinative.             In Smith v. Lindemann, No. 16-3357 (3d Cir. 2017) (non-precedential), an individual sued her former divorce attorney for malpractice even though the services agreements contained a standard arbitration clause saying that the parties “agree to submit such disagreements in binding arbitration.”  The lower court enforced the

Disqualification Would Not Have Happened If Just Amount Of Fees At Dispute.             Although this is a case from outside of California, we post on it to show potential disqualification issues which might arise when a firm representing itself in a fee dispute must prove more than just the reasonableness of fees being requested.            

Recovery Only Applied To Money Received By Clients, Teaching That Ambiguous Retainer Agreement Language Will Be Construed Against The Drafting Attorney.               Justice Fybel, the author of a 3-0 affirming opinion in Kadin v. ABS Power Brake Inc., Case No. G052734 (4th Dist., Div. 3 July 21, 2017) (unpublished), reminds us practitioners, especially litigators, to

  Opinion Was Issued On December 7, 2016.      ABA Formal Opinion 475 addresses how to deal with received fees from a client when different attorneys provided services to the client. Actually, a two part process is involved: (1) the fees must be held by the receiving attorney separate from the lawyer’s own separate property

  Would Allow For Fraudulent Billing, But Appellate Court Did Not Say A Longer Period For Review Might Pass Muster.     We have seen numerous attorney-client retainer agreements where there is a clause that says if a client does not dispute a billing entry within 10 or 15 days of receipt, all of the entries