|
sunEthics |
|
Florida Supreme Court amends Rules Regulating The Florida Bar, including adoption of rule governing lawyer-client contract provisions regarding arbitration of fee disputes [Added 12/24/07] Responding to a rules petition filed by the Florida Bar, the Florida Supreme Court amended a number of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar. The only amendment to the Rules of Professional Conduct (Chapter 4, Rules Regulating The Florida Bar) was the addition of new Rule 4-1.5(i), titled "Arbitration Clauses." This rule authorizes a lawyer to include a clause in a lawyer-client fee agreement specifying that any fee dispute will be decided through arbitration, provided (1) the lawyer advises the prospective client in writing to consider obtaining independent legal advice regarding the advisability of signing the agreement with the arbitration clause and (2) the agreement contains certain required language. New Rule 4-1.5(i) states: "A lawyer shall not make an agreement with a potential client prospectively providing for mandatory arbitration of fee disputes without first advising that person in writing that the potential client should consider obtaining independent legal advice as to the advisability of entering into an agreement containing such mandatory arbitration provisions. A lawyer shall not make an agreement containing such mandatory arbitration provisions unless the agreement contains the following language in bold print: NOTICE: This agreement contains provisions requiring arbitration of fee disputes. Before you sign this agreement you should consider consulting with another lawyer about the advisability of making an agreement with mandatory arbitration requirements. Arbitration proceedings are ways to resolve disputes without use of the court system. By entering into agreements that require arbitration as the way to resolve fee disputes, you give up (waive) your right to go to court to resolve those disputes by a judge or jury. These are important rights that should not be given up without careful consideration. The rule changes presented to the Court included a variety of other subjects. One proposed change that was rejected by the Court (at least for the time being) was a proposal to revise the procedural process for amending the Bar rules. The proposal would have added a Court "conference and dialogue" process as an option to the current "case and controversy" process. The Court noted that "[t]he proposal raises several issues that must be studied before implementing such a procedure. Therefore, the Court does not adopt the proposal at this time. Because the proposal presents significant unaddressed issues, the Court requests that the Bar undertake and submit a study addressing how, in states where the high courts have procedural rule or Bar rulemaking authority, those courts process their rule amendments. The report should also address the issue of ex parte communication with regard to communications among the Justices, proponents, and commentators." The Bar was directed to work with the Court's Rules of Judicial Administration Committee in preparing the report. Other rule changes that were approved by the Court address:
The rule amendments become effective on March 1, 2008. In re: Amendments to the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar, ___ So.2d ___ (Fla., No. SC06-736, 12/20/2007), 2007 WL 4440381. |
|
sunEthics is produced by Tim Chinaris, and hosted by Faulkner University's Jones School of Law. Please read our disclaimers. Search our site, or view previously posted summaries using our SUBJECT INDEX. © 2008 |