Alabama Bar Ethics Opinion Nº 1990-86 (1990-12-06)

• Date: 06 December 1990
• Opinion Number: 1990-86

ETHICS OPINION

RO-90-86

Contingent fee – attorney lien – quantum meruit

QUESTION:

* * *

"During the year of 1990, I entered into a contingent fee contract with a

client who suffered certain personal injuries. A copy of a like contract, however,

with hers being a one-third (1/3) contingent fee as opposed to the one-half (1/2) as

reflected in the attachment, was executed by the respective client. Over the course

of the employment, this attorney incurred certain advanced expenses, and also,

incurred actual work and labor on the case itself. Approximately four (4) months

after this attorney was employed, this attorney received a notice to terminate

employment with respective client. Client asked for previously employed attorney

to surrender her file for which said attorney obliged said request.

Attorney submitted certain money charges to past client evidenced of advanced

expenses, and an itemization of actual work and labor on said file from the date

of employment to the date of termination.

In reliance upon Johnson vs. Cerva, 508 So.2d 257 (1987) and Gaines and

Gaines vs. Hare, Wynn, 544 So.2d 445 (1989), which gives a discharged attorney

on a contingent fee contract a right to a fee based upon quantum merit and actual

services rendered prior to discharge, would this attorney be in violation of any

ethical standard with the Alabama Code of Professional Responsibility in the

event said attorney institutes a legal action in a competent court of jurisdiction

for the actual work and labor performed from the point of employment to the

point of termination?"

* * *

ANSWER:

The Code of Professional Responsibility provides in Disciplinary Rule

5-103(A)(1) as follows: