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.

<p><img style="max-width: 100%;height: auto" width="524" height="347" src="https://www.thelawforlawyerstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/1019/2015/07/client-files.jpg" class="attachment-lxb_af_3_of_4-wide size-lxb_af_3_of_4-wide wp-post-image" alt="" /></p>
			<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Overview</h2>
<p>What&rsquo;s worse than having a client go elsewhere, and then ask you to spend time helping your replacement? Yesterday (January 21, 2026), the American Bar Association&rsquo;s Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility issued <a href="https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/professional_responsibility/ethics-opinions/aba-formal-opinion-520.pdf">Formal Opinion 520</a>, clarifying the extent to which <a href="https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_1_16_declining_or_terminating_representation/">Model Rule 1.16(d)</a><strong> </strong>requires attorneys to convey information to a former client or successor counsel after representation ends. The opinion addresses the limited but important duty to provide unrecorded information that is necessary to protect a former client&rsquo;s interests, where doing so is reasonably practicable.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">What the opinion says</h2>
<p>Opinion 520 notes that surrendering the client&rsquo;s file and refunding unearned fees usually fulfills a lawyer&rsquo;s obligations upon termination.&nbsp;But there are circumstances in which a lawyer must also respond to targeted requests for information not memorialized in the file. This duty arises when the information was acquired during the representation, is not available from other sources, and is important to the former client&rsquo;s interests in the same matter.</p>
<p>The Committee builds on prior guidance, including <a href="https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/professional_responsibility/ethics-opinions/aba-formal-opinion-471.pdf">Formal Opinion 471</a> on surrendering papers and property and its discussion of circumstances requiring disclosure of certain internally generated materials, as well as <a href="https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/professional_responsibility/ethics-opinions/aba-formal-opinion-481.pdf">Formal Opinion 481</a><strong> </strong>distinguishing post-representation duties under <a href="https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_1_4_communications/">Rule 1.4</a>. These authorities frame the limited, necessity-driven nature of the post-termination information duty under Rule 1.16(d).</p>
<p>The opinion recognizes professional norms and select authorities that expect cooperation with successor counsel, particularly in criminal matters, and notes analogs in the Restatement (Third) of the Law Governing Lawyers &sect;33(c) and agency law. These underscore that material communications and relevant unrecorded information may need to be conveyed post-termination to protect client interests.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Rest assured, there are limits!</h2>
<p>The Opinion helpfully outlines what lawyers are <strong>not</strong> required to do.&nbsp;For example, memory limits matter&mdash;if you do not recall something, there is no duty to refresh your recollection. Likewise, lawyers need not acquire new information, generate written materials or responses, provide legal advice, prepare affidavits, or perform time-consuming tasks beyond what is reasonably practicable. Nor must they respond if the request seeks readily accessible information or would require educating the former client on the law.&nbsp;</p>
<p>The Opinion also provides helpful illustrations. For example, trial counsel must field limited questions from post-conviction counsel about strategy in the same criminal matter but need not draft statements or review materials beforehand.&nbsp;In addition, no response is required to requests concerning different matters.&nbsp;That includes the specific example that a lawyer in a completed transaction has no duty to answer questions aimed at a potential malpractice suit.</p>
<p>When triggered, the duty encompasses unrecorded facts, reasons for strategic choices, impressions of witness credibility, or unmemorialized client communications&mdash;so long as they were acquired in the representation and are necessary to protect the client&rsquo;s interests in that matter.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Practical implications</h2>
<p>Firms should maintain well-organized files and adopt procedures for prompt, reasonable responses to successor counsel, paired with clear communications to unrepresented former clients that no further representation is being provided absent agreement. Requests should be evaluated for necessity, practicability, and matter-relatedness, and conditioned on appropriate<a> </a><a href="https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_1_9_duties_of_former_clients/">Rule 1.9(c)</a> consent where successor counsel is involved. Depending on the circumstances and where you are located (for example, compare <a href="https://www.michbar.org/opinions/ethics/numbered_opinions/ri-296">Michigan</a> versus <a href="https://www.wisbar.org/formembers/ethics/Ethics%20Opinions/Wisconsin%20Formal%20Ethics%20Opinion%20EF-16-03%20File%20Return%20-%20final.pdf">Wisconsin</a>), attorneys may not be able to charge the client for their time or expenses incurred. Most states, such as <a href="https://ohioadvop.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Op_10-002.pdf">Ohio</a>, require&nbsp;lawyers to bear the costs of turning over a client&rsquo;s file, including copying costs.</p>
<p>At bottom, Formal Opinion 520 refines the protective scope of Rule 1.16(d); when unrecorded, matter-specific information is both necessary and feasible to share, the lawyer must convey it&mdash;nothing more, nothing less.</p>

What Lawyers Owe Former Clients After Representation Ends

Services