Advisory Opinion: 1025

Year Issued: 1987

RPC(s): RPC 1.5; 1.6(b)

Subject: Contingent fee in civil forfeiture proceeding

The Committee was of the opinion that RPC 1.5(d)(2) would not prohibit you from undertaking to represent a client in a civil forfeiture proceeding on a contingent fee basis, even if you were also representing that client on related criminal charges, since the civil forfeiture proceeding is not a criminal proceeding. In reviewing the particular contingent fee agreement, the Committee was of the opinion that it was inartfully drawn and that any such agreement must comply with the requirements of RPC 1.5(a), (b) and (c). Lastly, the Committee was of the opinion that the case of Seventh Elect Church v. Rogers, 102 Wn.2d 527, 688 P.2d 506 (1984) resolves the question of what a lawyer must do when a client directs the lawyer not to disclose the fee agreement, and notes that RPC 1.6(b) provides that a lawyer cannot reveal client secrets without a court order.

Advisory Opinions are provided for the education of the Bar and reflect the opinion of the Committee on Professional Ethics (CPE) or its predecessors. Advisory Opinions are provided pursuant to the authorization granted by the Board of Governors, but are not individually approved by the Board and do not reflect the official position of the Bar association. Laws other than the Washington State Rules of Professional Conduct may apply to the inquiry. The Committee's answer does not include or opine about any other applicable law other than the meaning of the Rules of Professional Conduct.