Practicing With Professionalism - South Carolina Bar Association

(Attorney, representing another attorney in an employment case,
attempted to convert an hourly fee agreement to a contingent fee
agreement before trial, and then faced a declaratory judgment action
concerning the existence of the contingent fee agreement when he sought
a 25% contingent fee share of the settlement proceeds.). Some
jurisdictions presume such modifications to be unfair to the client.
4. The fee agreement should specifically address, and the client agree to, the
terms ofpayment, including amount, time, and form" ofpayment. People
v. Peters, 849 P.2d 51 (Colo. 1993). (Attorney received discipline for a
pattern of improper collection procedures, including: acceptance of postdated
checks; requests of a client to bring additional funds to a particular
court hearing; threats to a client to withdraw-·if fee payments were not
made; .failure to withdraw when a client discharged the attorney,
following request for additional payments of fees; attempting to transfer
vehicle titles as security for a client's promissory note in lieu of fees; and
billing for court appearances when only telephone calls were made to the
court.) (suspension, 45 days);
5. An agreement for an excessive fee will not avoid the consequences of
misconduct. People v. Banman, 901 P.2d 469 (Colo. 1995). (Attorney
and client, a woman in her eighties, signed an agreement for attorney's
services on "all business activities" including the handling of income,
estate tax planning and tax returns, where attorney was to be compensated
$350,000 for the first year, and $200,000 plus adjustments in each of the
following years. Discipline was also based on other misconduct.)
(suspension, three years);
6. Over-billing under the terms of a fee agreement violates rules against
dishonest conduct and collection ofexcessive fees.
a. People v. Shields, 905 P.2d 608 (Colo. 1995). (Attorney, whose
contract with a county social services department provided for
charges based upon hours ofwork multiplied by an hourly rate and
specifically prohibited duplicative work, was disciplined for billing
time spent bya subcontracted attorney and.a law clerk at his own
hourly rate, and for increasing the time actually spent by the
subcontracted attorney and the law clerk. Attorney claimed the
increases included his review ofthe work.) (suspension, one yearone
day); and
7. Failure to comply with specific clauses ofthe fee agreement may result in
discipline.
a. People v. Mills, 923 P.2d 116 (Colo. 1996). (Attorney representing
bankrupt farmer, included a specific statement in the fee agreement
referring to required approval offee bills by the bankruptcy court,
Professionalism eLE (20()4)