Source: https://wvyounglawyers.com/practice-handbook/legal-ethics/
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 07:04:38+00:00

Document:
guidance when questions arise are important first steps.
Disciplinary Board or the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia on these matters.
provide helpful examples and analysis.
for a cause of action and are not enforceable by the Lawyer Disciplinary Board.
11Committee on Legal Ethics.. and had a slightly different structure.
the Hearing Panel [discussed in complaint procedures section, below].
The Board as a whole considers policy matters and issues formal advisory opinions [called L.E.O.s, or “legal ethics opinions” 1 discussed below.
The Office of Disciplinary Counsel [ODC] is the full-time staff of the Lawyer Disciplinary Board.
as legal counsel to the Board.
investigation are shown to lack merit, and prosecutes lawyers where complaints do have merit.
Duties of the ODC are set forth in the RLDP.
appears to be a danger to the public.
1 These Opinions were called L.E.I.s, or “legal ethics inquiries” until2006.
formal sworn complaint and investigation.
each year. Please call before you act!
may, and often do, file against the opposing counsel.
A lawyer at ODC evaluates the complaint to determine whether it alleges a violation on its face.
Counsel closing may be appealed by the Complainant to the Investigative Panel [“IP”].
are dismissed by the ODC or the IP, and do not go further in the process.
of fact, conclusions of law, and a recommended sanction to the Subcommittee for consideration.
the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia.
but gives substantial deference to the Hearing Panel Subcommittee’s findings of fact.
The Supreme Court then issues a decision, which can either be published or unpublished.
based upon that out-of-state sanction.
their home addresses or phone numbers should list work information instead.
resolved, as described in the next section.
provided to the lawyer.” RLDP Rule 2.6.
complaint was determined to be frivolous.
Court is placed in ODC’s public file.
responding on his/her own and how serious the allegations are.
usual format. The response must be verified.
investigation is not necessarily synonymous with how serious ODC believes the complaint to be.
Opinions]. These opinions are not binding upon the Supreme Court, but are binding upon the Board.
including the comment sections and any annotated cases pertaining to the applicable rule.
at no charge. Phone (304) 558-7999.
on the State Bar’s homepage atwww.wvbar.org or may be obtained by calling the ODC.
the rules are provided. This reference is available in most law libraries.
identical, but not all. There may be a charge for this service. Call 800-285-2221 (option B).
Virginia 25326, telephone number (304) 558-0169.
witnesses, not performing discovery, not filing documents in a timely manner or at all, etc.
a lawyer to ..act with reasonable diligence and promptness”.
that matter and communication with your client are absolutely critical to avoid complaints.
permit support staff to give legal advice.
litigation may need more time with you than a business CEO would, but you must spend the time.
written letter to the client confirming the situation is a good step.
same rules apply to Internet advertising. [L.E.I. 98-03).
words “Advertising Material” on the outside of the envelope.
Legal Ethics v. McCorkle, 452 S.E.2d 377 (W. Va. 1994); Lawyer Disciplinary Board v.
service. [Rule 7.2(c)]. The line between advertising and paid referrals is sometimes blurred.
before entering into these types of agreements.
partnership. [Rule 7.5(d)]. You may include the names of deceased partners or retired partners.
You cannot use the name of those individuals who have left the firm and are still practicing.
you or file an ethics complaint against you if they are dissatisfied].
that only members of this Bar on active status may be shareholders.
insurance or self-insurance and meet other requirements. W.Va. Code §31-1B-1, et seq. and W.Va.
or company, your letterhead must disclose this fact.
basis of your fee at the beginning of the representation or within a reasonable time thereafter.
method of its determination. [Rule 1.5(c)].
charged in light of the eight factors set forth in Rule 1.5(a). Committee on Legal Ethics v.
Gallaher, 376 S.E.2d 346 (W. Va. 1988).
you may file an attorney’s lien to protect your rights to any recovery. See Rule 1.16(d) and L.E.I.
89-02 and 92″02 for other obligations to clients upon termination or withdraw.
West Virginia, although the Board has issued an opinion, L.E.I.
reasonableness test set forth in RPC Rule 1.5(a).
permits an attorney to charge no more than 20% of benefits to be received in a 208 week period.
reasons of public policy. Committee on Legal Ethics v. Burdette, 445 S.E.2d 733 (W. Va.
you are defending against a protest and actually perform legal work.
The fees you charge in Social Security and Black Lung cases are governed by federal regulations.
Security Administration directs you to refund a portion of your fee, do so promptly.
negotiate with the creditor on your client’s behalf, but you cannot ignore your earlier promise.
S.E.2d 669 (1990), holds that the insurance company must pay its pro rata share of attorney’s fees.
Law Master’s recommended decision until you receive payment. [L.E.I.
waiver from the client, then neither may you. [Comment, Rule 1.7].
the client as an adverse witness. Committee on Legal Ethics v. Frame, 433 S.E.2d 579 (W.Va. 1993).
former client in the “same or substantially related matter”, unless the former client consents.
ex rei. McClanahan v. Hamilton, 430 S.E.2d 569 (W. Va.
disqualification motions, possible sanctions, or ethics complaints.
Board v. McGraw, 461 S.E.2d 850 (W.Va. 1995).
representing the opposing party, even though you were not hired or paid by the first individual.
consultations to your conflicts check system.
of whether or not the lawyer is switching sides.
Contact with Unrepresented Party: You must not state or imply you are uninterested. [Rule 4.3].
sign, and must not even present a form answer for the unrepresented spouse’s use. See Walden v.
Hoke, 429 S.E.2d 504 (W.Va. 1993), Committee on Legal Ethics v. Frame, 433 S.E.2d 579 (W.Va. 1993).
that he/she is not safeguarding the unrepresented party’s interests. [Rule 4.3].
transaction includes borrowing money from and loaning money to a client.
recent years. Lawyer Disciplinary Board v. King, 650 S.E.2d 165 (W.Va. 2007).
prospectively limit your liability for malpractice unless the client is independently represented.
or there will be an ethics complaint in your future.
you are the closing attorney in a real estate transaction. Please review this opinion carefully.
The opinion contains a helpful notification form for your use.
malpractice, your personal liability is eminent and you could lose your savings, your house, etc.
pay your client in cash.
whose behalf withdrawals are made or checks are written.
S.E.2d 619 (W.Va. 1998); Lawyer Disciplinary Board v. Wheaton, 610 S.E.2d 8 (W.Va. 2004).
Misappropriation is an offense which generally results in disbarment.
upon recovery. You may also pay such costs outright for indigent clients. [Rule 1.8(e)(1) & (2)].
etc. Do not advance money pending receipt of a settlement or benefits check.
litigation. Payment for medical treatment cannot.
follow the same ethical practices which lawyers must follow. [Rule 5.3 and L.E.I. 76-07].
contact the Committee on Unlawful Practice at the West Virginia State Bar.
S.E.2d 68 (W.Va. 1991). Also read Rule 4.2 and State ex rei. CAMC v. Zakaib, 437 S.E.2d 759 (W.Va.
non-testifying experts, see Rule 26(b)(4)(B).
continue to practice law. To continue to practice would be an ethics violation. [Rule 5.5(a)].
Rule 1.6. Lawyer Disciplinary Board v. Farber, 488 S.E.2d 460 (W.Va. 1997).
his/her bill, you must turn over work product as the work has been paid for.
a receipt indicating that the file has been released.
theories involved. The client is also entitled to an accounting or itemization from the attorney.
sets forth your file retention policy.
reasonable for a client to expect that the lawyer will still maintain the client’s property.
five years, such as files pertaining to the claims of minor children and certain tax matters.
exposed to a malpractice claim beyond five years.
which results in complete destruction. [L.E.I.
“Members” and then “Succession Plans”.

References: v. 
 v.

 §31
 v.

 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.