A proposed rule aimed at capping attorney referral fees in contingent fee cases is on the agenda of the Michigan Supreme Court’s September 28 public hearing.
The rule would apply to cases where the attorney’s compensation is an agreed-upon share of the case award or settlement.
Under the proposed amendment of Michigan Rule of Professional Conduct 1.5 (ADM File No. 2010-07), an attorney who refers a contingent fee case to another attorney could receive a referral fee, but the fee would be capped at “25 percent of the amount recovered.”
The rule change is aimed at discouraging attorneys from operating as brokering services and directing clients to lawyers who pay the highest referral fees.
A referring attorney who also contributes a “substantial input of time or cost, or assumption of risk” could receive a larger fee if the other attorney agrees and if the court approves.
The Court will also discuss whether to adopt one of two alternative proposals regarding an attorney’s ethical obligation to provide pro bono services (ADM File No. 2010-18; proposed amendments to of MRPC 6.1).
Alternative A would clarify that attorneys are not subject to disciplinary proceedings to enforce the pro bono rule. Alternative B would require Michigan attorneys to donate 30 hours of professional time or handle three pro bono cases per year, and/or contribute $300 or $500 per year to programs that provide legal services to the poor.
The Michigan Supreme Court periodically holds administrative hearings to allow interested persons to comment on proposed court rule changes and other administrative matters on the Court’s agenda.
Speakers will be allotted three minutes each to present their views, after which they may be questioned by the Justices.
To reserve a place on the agenda, please contact the Office of the Clerk of the Court in writing at P.O. Box 30052, Lansing, Michigan 48909, or by e-mail at MSC_clerk@courts.mi.gov, no later than Monday, September 26, 2011. Requests to speak should include the ADM file numbers for the agenda items the speaker wishes to discuss.
– Information provided by the Michigan Supreme Court.
The Michigan Lawyer 