NH Ethics Committee

While nonrefundable fee retainers are normally permissible in N.H., they are still subject to reasonableness mandated by Rule 1.5, and are an impermissable imposition charged by a guardian ad litem in a divorce case. (Rules 1.5; 1.16)

There is no voluntary, contractual relationship between a court appointed guardian ad litem in a divorce case, and the child’s parents, and consequently there can be no fee negotiation disclosure. (Rules 4.2; 4.3)

It is preferable to have a written fee agreement. (Rule 1.5(b))

A lawyer may not serve as a part-time municipal prosecutor and as criminal defense counsel in the same district court in that the potential for actual conflict of interest in this situation is real and substantial in both criminal and civil matters and that maintenance of the high standards of confidentiality seems impossible in such a situation.  (Rules 1.6; 1.7)

While nonrefundable fee retainers are normally permissible in N.H., they are still subject to reasonableness mandated by Rule 1.5, and are an impermissable imposition charged by a guardian ad litem in a divorce case. (Rules 1.5; 1.16)

There is no voluntary, contractual relationship between a court appointed guardian ad litem in a divorce case, and the child’s parents, and consequently there can be no fee negotiation disclosure. (Rules 4.2; 4.3)

It is preferable to have a written fee agreement. (Rule 1.5(b))

While nonrefundable fee retainers are normally permissible in N.H., they are still subject to reasonableness mandated by Rule 1.5, and are an impermissable imposition charged by a guardian ad litem in a divorce case. (Rules 1.5; 1.16)

There is no voluntary, contractual relationship between a court appointed guardian ad litem in a divorce case, and the child’s parents, and consequently there can be no fee negotiation disclosure. (Rules 4.2; 4.3)

It is preferable to have a written fee agreement. (Rule 1.5(b))

The ABA Model Code Comments were not adopted or approved by the NH Supreme Court and are therefore only aspirational, and the suggestion that the attorney “conscientiously consider” participation in a fee dispute resolution procedure is a partial retreat from the EC 2-23. (Terminology, Rule 1.5)

An attorney is not required under the Rules to participate under the NHBA’s Fee Dispute Resolution Committee. Because the Committee is not the client, an attorney is not required to provide the Committee with requested information. (Rule 1.4)