It is my understanding that the appropriate manner in which to handle exiting lawyers from a firm is to do a letter on firm letterhead explaining the situation. Clients clearly have the choice of who will be thier attorney in a family part case. Unfortunately, in all too many situations an associate decides to leave a firm and gives notice. Thereafter, he/she is escorted to the door. Clients reach out to the "exited" attorney, when another attorney in the firm is assigned to handle the case. A letter providing options to the client is never sent. Frankly, I have even seen situations where the former firm attempts to "buy" clients by offering them discounts, or tries to disuade clients from leaving by charging exhobitant transfer of file fees.
I see no issue with the hourly rate query posited below as it is common for attorneys to remain at the same rate until they have some reason to justify an increase.
At the end of the day, I will always commend and compliment my former partner who acted in the utmost of gentlmanly manner when we parted ways. There was very little confusion for the clients and the transition in such a difficult situation was smooth. I always attempt to encourage others to act in such a manner.
asc
-------------------------------------------
Amy Sara Cores, Esq.
Fellow of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers
Certified by the Supreme Court of New Jersey as a Matrimonial Law Attorney
Cores & Nachlinger, L.L.C.
1001 US Highway 9 N
Suite 205
Howell, New Jersey 07731
732 - 414 - 6669 office
732 - 770 - 2341 cell
732 - 414 - 6660 fax
http://www.cnfamilylaw.com http://www.facebook.com/cnfamilylaw Follow John on twitter @njfamlaw
Blog: cnfamilylaw.wordpress.com
-------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 05-05-2013 14:11
From: Curtis Romanowski
Subject: The purloined client
The Supreme Court recently issued a unanimous opinion in Nostrame v. Santiago (A-40-11) - a case we have been curiously watching, dealing with whether a lawyer whose case/client is "taken away" by another lawyer can maintain a tort action for "tortious interference." The opinion is now available on the Court's website.
Writing for the Court, Justice Hoens concluded essentially that tortious interference claims are theoretically possible in lawyer switching situations. Of interest to me was Justice Hoens' observation that the wrongdoing could consist of RPC violations, such as those limiting solicitation.
I have a question that I do not yet have a definitive answer to. It it this: A lawyer leaving a Firm has a conversation with a Firm client after notifying that client (in writing, but without copying the Firm on that writing) to the effect this exiting lawyer, in his new firm, can probably handle the client's case less expensively in the new firm than the firm he was with when the client was retained. The exiting lawyer is billing at exactly the same rate in the new firm.
Is this actionable? Is this ethical? I am uncertain as to both, but I am getting a fairly good idea. Thank you for any help you may be able to offer.
-------------------------------------------
Curtis Romanowski Esq.
Senior Attorney - Proprietor
Brielle NJ
(732)603-8585
-------------------------------------------