Ethics Opinions 1980-1989

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)

Ethics Committee Formal Opinion #1988/9-2 Letterhead Listing – Use of “Of Counsel” Designation by Inactive Bar Member December 8, 1988 ANNOTATIONS: It would be misleading for an “inactive member” of NHBA to be included on a law

Ethics Committee Formal Opinion #1988/9-3 Letterhead Listing – Affiliated Law Firms February 9, 1989 ANNOTATIONS: There is no outright prohibition against an attorney who is town moderator also representing clients before the local land use boards of

Ethics Committee Formal Opinion #1988/9-5 Letterhead Listing – Affiliated Law Firms February 9, 1989 ANNOTATIONS: Two or more lawyers, each of whom is a sole practitioner, may affiliate so long as each attorney observes the requirements of

Ethics Committee Formal Opinion #1988/9-6 Conflict of Interest: Representation of Separated Parties November 10, 1988 ANNOTATIONS: A conflict of interest may arise for an attorney handling pension and estate planning matters in the dual representation of a

Ethics Committee Formal Opinion #1988/9-8 Conflict of Interest:  Lawyer-Official/Lawyer-Legislator Appearing Before Certain Agencies/Forums December 8, 1988 ANNOTATIONS: An actively practicing lawyer who is a member of the legislature must comply with Rule 1.11A, and carefully analyze on

Ethics Committee Advisory Opinion #1988/9-9 Fees:  Arrangement Which Effectively Passes Costs on to a Third Party December 8, 1988 ANNOTATIONS: A lawyer shall not enter into an agreement for, charge, or collect an illegal or clearly excessive

Ethics Committee Informal Opinion #1988/9-11 Conflict of Interest:  Representation of Police Prosecutor March 9, 1989 ANNOTATIONS: A Lawyer and the law firm having a police-prosecutor as a divorce client, will in most cases be prohibited from representing