Formal Opinion 144.
(1970)
Lien on Support Money or Alimony Payments

An inquiry to the Legal Ethics Committee has been made concerning the right of an attorney to exercise an attorney’s lien on support money and alimony payments received by him as the result of his representation of a client in a domestic relations matter.

The following rules should apply:

1. If, during the course of divorce litigation, a lawyer shall find himself in possession of funds which have been paid to him for the express purpose of fulfilling the opposing party’s obligations for support money of minor children, or for alimony pendente lite, such lawyer may not ethically withhold or charge said funds for the payment of his fees, but shall be obligated to pay the same out for the purpose or purposes for which they were given; provided, however, the lawyer may in proper cases, upon motion, and in all cases dependent upon the circumstances, seek and obtain a court order as to whether and to what extent moneys received by him shall or shall not be subject to the attorney’s lien, and/or under what circumstances a conflicting specification for use of funds may be made by the paying party.

2. After the divorce litigation is terminated by entry of decree, then as to funds then held or thereafter coming into the

hands of the attorney, such attorney is entitled as a matter of legal ethics, and except in cases where an express trust exists negating such right, to assert against such funds his right of lien to secure or obtain payment of fees owed to him by his client. An "express trust" shall be deemed created by the lawful written stipulation of the paying party that such funds are paid for a specific purpose or where, under all of the circumstances, the lawyer does or should understand that the funds were delivered for such specific purpose to the exclusion of all other conflicting uses.

3. The attorney shall in no case, either during or after divorce litigation, assert his lien against funds paid to him for the express purpose of fulfilling any party’s duty to support minor children.

4. The attorney shall in all cases be conscious of the damage to the image of the profession by improper or unreasonable assertion of the lien accorded by R.C.W. 60.40.010.

We read that portion of R.C.W. 60.40.010 which confers a lien upon money coming into his hands "belonging to his client" as excluding support money for minor children (since they are not "his client") and also those moneys as to which a trust exists, Canon 11.

[See Opinion 181 ]