The Language In The Contingency Agreement, Sustained On Appeal, Offers Some Drafting Tips To Attorneys In Fashioning Their Retainer Agreements.
Some drafting tips for retainer agreements are presented through the result affirmed in Meagher v. Robinson Bradford LP, Case No. C087478 (3d Dist. Apr. 21, 2020) (unpublished), where attorneys fought back several challenges to both their retention agreement and handling of matters for an ex-client.
Appellant claimed that the attorneys’ contingency agreement was voidable under Business & Professions Code section 6147 because it failed to adequately define the scope of legal services for which fees could be charged with respect to “related matters” arising out of the attorney-client relationship not covered by the contingency agreement. The Third District disagreed:
“We find that the fee agreement contains the required related matters statement. In paragraph 2, [the law firm] expressly agreed to represent [ex-client] and her company in the unlawful detainer and civil action. The agreement further provides in paragraph 10 that [the law firm’s] representation does not include ‘any other legal matters’ and paragraph 2 states that representation in any other matter ‘will require a separate written agreement.’ We find this language meets the requirements of section 6147, subdivision (a)(3), and therefore conclude that the agreement was not voidable under section 6147, subdivision (b).”