Careers

Diversity, Equity & Inclusion

Experience

Innovation

Interactive Maps

Locations

About

Pages

Meet our team of innovators
Ask us how we do it

Professionals

Insights

Services

Thompson Hine LLP, a full-service business law firm with approximately 400 lawyers in 11 offices, was ranked number 1 in the category “Most innovative North American law firms: New working models” by The Financial Times and was 1 of 7 firms shortlisted for The American Lawyer’s inaugural Legal Services Innovation Award. The firm has been recognized by the National Law Journal as a Legal Technology Trailblazer and featured by Bloomberg for its innovative service delivery models, which drive accuracy and predictability. The firm’s commitment to innovation is embodied in Thompson Hine SmartPaTHTM – a smarter way to work – predictable, efficient and aligned with client goals. For more information, please visit ThompsonHine.com and ThompsonHine.com/SmartPaTH.

Home | Thompson Hine LLP

Atlanta

Chicago

Cincinnati

Cleveland

Columbus

Dayton

Los Angeles

Minneapolis

New York

Silicon Valley

Washington, D.C.

<a href="http://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_1_2_scope_of_representation_allocation_of_authority_between_client_lawyer.html"><img style="max-width: 100%;height: auto;max-width: 100%;height: auto" loading="lazy" class="alignright size-medium wp-image-1168" alt="Limits sign" src="https://www.thelawforlawyerstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/754/2014/10/Limits-sign-300x300.jpg" width="300" height="300">Rule 1.2(c)</a> of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct permits lawyers to enter into limited-scope engagements, in which you can agree with the client that you will be providing only certain designated legal services, and not&nbsp;the full scope of&nbsp;services that might ordinarily be expected in an engagement of that sort.&nbsp; The rule is a way to&nbsp;help clients control costs when all they want or need is limited representation.
Over at <a href="http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/legal_profession/2014/10/the-minnesota-supreme-court-has-reversed-and-vacated-an-admonition-issued-by-the-director-of-its-office-of-lawyers-profession.html">The Legal Profession Blog</a>, there is a report about a <a href="http://www.mncourts.gov/opinions/sc/current/OPA131856-100814.pdf">disciplinary case </a>in which the Minnesota Supreme Court invoked Rule 1.2 in reversing&nbsp;a lawyer&rsquo;s admonishment for conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.
The lawyer had agreed with his client in a collaborative divorce case that the scope of services would include the lawyer&rsquo;s appearance at only one hearing, in exchange for a flat fee.&nbsp; When the lawyer failed to appear at subsequent post-divorce-decree hearings, the trial court filed a disciplinary complaint, although it had previously&nbsp;noted after the first hearing that the lawyer was no longer&nbsp;counsel of record.
The disciplinary panel found that the lawyer should have informed the court that his&nbsp;agreement with the client excluded court appearances.&nbsp; On review, the state supreme court disagreed,&nbsp;in large part because the client &ldquo;instructed [the lawyer] not to attend the hearings pursuant to the terms of&nbsp;a limited-scope legal representation, the propriety of which&rdquo; was unchallenged.
The reversal of the lawyer&rsquo;s admonishment is the right outcome here; there was no suggestion that the limitation on the scope of the services was unreasonable, or&nbsp;that the client&rsquo;s informed consent was lacking.
According to <a href="http://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/frisch-michael-s.cfm">Prof. Mike Frisch</a>, at The Legal Profession Blog, disciplinary opinions acknowledging the efficacy of Rule&nbsp;1.2 are&nbsp;not common.&nbsp; This one underscores the advantage of a&nbsp;clear engagement letter,&nbsp;and the importance of describing just what services you will and will not provide.&nbsp; That&rsquo;s a good watchword for any engagement &mdash; here, it helped save a lawyer from discipline.
&nbsp;

core/freeform

Ethics

Legal Ethics, Professional Responsibility and the Business of Law

Limited-scope engagement letter helps lawyer avoid discipline