The ethics of non-refundable conservation persons is the subject of Notice 611. The conclusion of the notice is that “non-refundable conservation rights holders” who are advanced for payment of future legal services will be reimbursed in the absence of legal representation. Accordingly, it is ethical to deposit this type of non-refundable storage bars into the lawyer`s operating account and not into a trust account. Lawyers can transfer these funds to their operating accounts if their fees are earned. Non-refundable storages paid exclusively to ensure the availability of a lawyer are immediately earned and can be deposited directly into operating accounts. Criminal lawyers often treat thieves as if they were earned by paying. Lawyers from other law firms may also do so if the payment is considered a flat fee, although future legal work is required. Family lawyers often require a non-refundable retainator, in part to prevent purchases that family lawyers in some jurisdictions may conflict with them. According to the opinion, the nature of this levy must be characterized. In Opinion 610, the Opinion Board stated that it was not ethical for lawyers to maintain a security interest in a client`s complaint under Texas law. Interviews with some bar officials suggest that a similar provision applies when lawyers receive a portion of a client`s complaint. Potential pricing agreements in Texas generally contain provisions that give either a security interest or a transfer of a customer`s stock to ensure payment of a potential tax. Two Texan ethics experts recently submitted by the Professional Ethics Committee for the State Bar of Texas can change the way lawyers structure contingency pricing agreements and non-refundable conservation individuals.
Although the opinions of the commissions are not final, they are a convincing authority in the interpretation of ethical rules. Lawyers should carefully consider whether their fee practices should change in light of these new opinions.