From the
Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel
Informal Opinion Number 940122

QUESTION: Attorney would like to co-sign a consumer loan for a client in a
personal injury case.

ANSWER: This would violate Rule 4-1.8(e).

The Missouri Bar, P.O. Box 119, Jefferson City, MO 65102-0119

From the
Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel
Informal Opinion Number 950224

QUESTION: Attorney represents injured employees in workers compensation
cases. Many Attorney’s pay the cost of medical treatment and transportation for
medical treatment for the employee while the case is pending if the employee
cannot afford it otherwise?

ANSWER: Under Rule 4-1.8(e) an attorney may not provide financial assistance
to a client except to advance costs and expenses or, if the client is
indigent, to pay costs and expenses. Therefore, Attorney may not pay or
advance the costs of the client’s medication, treatment or travel expenses
related to treatment. However, if the visit to the health care provider is
genuinely for the purpose of evaluation for the litigation, even if it is
also for treatment, Attorney may advance the expenses of the visit and the
transportation. However, to the extent that the evaluation portion of the
visit can be segregated from the treatment portion, Attorney may only
advance the expenses related to the evaluation.

The Missouri Bar, P.O. Box 119, Jefferson City, MO 65102-0119

Advisory Opinion Number: 20000006

QUESTION: Client would like to enter into an agreement with a
company that essentially makes a loan against the potential recovery on
Client’s personal injury case. The company will agree not to seek
payment from Client for the loan if no recovery is made. Before the
company will loan Client the money they require information concerning
Client’s medical bills, medical records, police reports, liens, an
estimated amount of recovery on the claim and Attorney’s estimated value
of the claim. Client has directed Attorney to provide the information to
the company. Question 1. Are there any ethical problems with divulging
this information to a third party? Is it necessary to get a written
waiver of the privilege from Client? Question 2. Is there any ethical
problem with Attorney signing an agreement with the loan company to pay
that company directly from Attorney’s trust account after the recovery
is made? Question 3. If Client changes his or her mind and refuses to
allow payment from Attorney’s trust, would Attorney violate Attorney’s
fiduciary duty to Client by disbursing the payment when there is not a
valid lien and only the signed agreement?

ANSWER: Answer 1. This opinion only addresses Attorney’s
responsibilities under Supreme Court Rule 4. It does not address the
advantages and disadvantages of the arrangement nor the application of
any other laws to the arrangement. If Attorney participates in this type
of arrangement, Attorney must advise Client about all aspects of the
arrangement and make sure that Client understands all of the
implications. One aspect that Client must understand and agree to is
that they cannot ensure that the other party would or could maintain
confidentiality of the information Attorney provides. Attorney may not
participate in the arrangement and then withhold information required by
the arrangement, even if Client so requests, without disclosing that
Attorney is withholding information. That conduct could involve
assisting Client with a fraud or dishonest conduct under Rule 4-8.4(c).
Answer 2. This is permissible, if Client consents. Answer 3. If Attorney
enters into the agreement described in Question 2 and Client changes his
or her mind, Attorney would not be able to disburse the funds to Client
or the company, until the dispute is resolved. Under those
circumstances, Attorney would hold the funds in Attorney’s trust account
for a reasonable period of time to allow them to resolve the dispute. If
they did not resolve the dispute in a reasonable period of time,
Attorney would interplead the disputed funds.

Advisory Opinion Number: 990184

QUESTION: Attorney is representing Client in a personal injury
matter. Client is experiencing a financial hardship and has contacted a
corporation that provides interim funding to individuals with claims or
lawsuits pending. In order to consider providing an advance to Client,
the corporation has asked Attorney to provide case documents for review
and fill out necessary forms. The corporation has explained to Client
that it is an advance against an impending settlement, not a loan, and
the advance is risky and the corporation’s fees are high. Even though
Attorney has fully discussed the matter with Client and expressed
caution concerning the interest rates, Client has asked Attorney to
provide the necessary paperwork to the corporation. Would it be ethical
for Attorney to participate in this type of agreement?

ANSWER: This opinion only addresses Attorney’s responsibilities
under Supreme Court Rule 4. It does not address the advantages and
disadvantages of the arrangement nor the application of any other laws
to the arrangement. If Attorney agrees to participate in this
arrangement, Attorney has obligations to advise Client about all aspects
of the arrangement and to look after Client’s interests. One aspect
would be ensuring that the other party agrees to maintain
confidentiality regarding information Attorney provides. Attorney may
not participate in the arrangement and then withhold information
required by the arrangement without disclosing that Attorney is
withholding information. That conduct could involve assisting Client
with a fraud or dishonest conduct under Rule 4-8.4(c).

Back to the Ethics Map