Formal Opinion 4. - Contingent Fees
(1951)

This will acknowledge receipt of your letter of January 10,1951, requesting the opinion of this committee as to whether it is ethical for an attorney to make a contingent fee agreement with a party to a divorce action based upon a percentage of property obtained by the attorney for his client in the divorce action.

While it appears that the Supreme Court of the State of Washington has never passed on the question of the legality of such contingent fee contracts, the law as to the same, as determined by other courts, is stated in 5 Am. Jur., page 361, section 166, as follows:

"A contract for the payment of a fee to an attorney, contingent upon his procuring a divorce for his client or contingent in amount of alimony to be obtained, is void, as against public policy."

The committee is of the opinion that it is unethical for an attorney to make a contingent fee agreement with a party to a divorce action based upon a percentage of property obtained by the attorney for his client in the divorce action.

[See RPC 1.5(d)(1)]