WSR 20-23-112
RULES OF COURT
STATE SUPREME COURT
[November 6, 2020]
IN THE MATTER OF THE SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS TO RPC 1.13—ORGANIZATION AS CLIENT, CMT. [4] AND RPC 1.16—DECLINING OR TERMINATING REPRESENTATION, NEW WASHINGTON CMT. [16]
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ORDER
NO. 25700-A-1321
The Washington State Bar Association Board of Governors, having recommended the suggested amendments to RPC 1.13—Organization as Client, cmt. [4] and RPC 1.16—Declining or Terminating Representation, new Washington cmt. [16], and the Court having approved the suggested amendments for publication;
Now, therefore, it is hereby
ordered:
(a) That pursuant to the provisions of GR 9(g), the suggested amendments as shown below are to be published for comment in the Washington Reports, Washington Register, Washington State Bar Association and Administrative Office of the Court's websites in January 2021.
(b) The purpose statement as required by GR 9(e), is published solely for the information of the Bench, Bar and other interested parties.
(c) Comments are to be submitted to the Clerk of the Supreme Court by either U.S. Mail or Internet E-Mail by no later than April 30, 2021. Comments may be sent to the following addresses: P.O. Box 40929, Olympia, Washington 98504-0929, or supreme@courts.wa.gov. Comments submitted by e-mail message must be limited to 1500 words.
dated at Olympia, Washington this 6th day of November, 2020.
 
For the Court
 
 
 
Stephens, C.J.
 
CHIEF JUSTICE
GR9 COVER SHEET
Suggested Amendments to
THE RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT (RPC)
Rule 1.16, Comment [4] and Rule 1.13 Additional Washington Comment [16]
Submitted by the Board of Governors of the Washington State Bar Association
A.Name of Proponent: Washington State Bar Association
B.Spokespersons:
Rajeev Majumdar, President, Washington State Bar Association, 1325 4th Avenue, Suite 600, Seattle, Washington 98101-2539
Jeanne Marie Clavere, Professional Responsibility Counsel, Washington State Bar Association, 1325 4th Avenue, Suite 600, Seattle, Washington 98101-2539
C.Purpose:
The purpose of the suggested amendments are to alert lawyers to consult the holding of a recent decision of the Washington State Supreme Court, Karstetter v. King County Corrections Guild, 193 Wn.2d 672, 444 P.2d 1185 (2019). RPC 1.16 (a)(3) provides that "a lawyer shall not represent a client … if … the lawyer is discharged." Current comment [4] to the rule provides that "A client may discharge a lawyer at any time, with or without cause, subject to liability for the lawyer's services." On its face, the Rule and comment suggest that any lawyer may be fired by a client without any recourse by the lawyer except for fees already earned.
In Karstetter, the Court held that lawyers employed as in-house counsel and lawyers with comparable employment relationships face unique employment expectations. Accordingly, the Court held that such lawyers may retain the ability to bring contract and wrongful discharge actions if those actions can be brought without damaging the integrity of the client-lawyer relationship.
The suggested amendments are intended to alert lawyers consulting the RPCs to this decision in two places. First, RPC 1.16 is directly impacted by the Karstetter decision. The suggested amendment adds additional language to Comment [4] pointing lawyers consulting the rule to the Karstetter decision. The new language of Comment [4], which would be a Washington revision, would read as follows: "However, the rule may apply differently with respect to in-house lawyers and lawyers with comparable employment situations. See Karstetter v. King County Corrections Guild, 193 Wn.2d 672, 444 P.3d 1185 (2019)."
Second, RPC 1.13 is focused on the responsibilities of lawyers for entities. As such, it would be appropriate to also add a reference to Karstetter in the comments to that rule. The amendment would add an "Additional Washington Comment [16]" at the end of the RPC 1.13 comments, which would read as follows: "In-house lawyers and lawyers with comparable employment situations may face unique employment expectations that impact their rights if discharged by the client. See Karstetter v. King County Corrections Guild, 193 Wn.2d 672, 444 P.3d 1185 (2019); Comment [4] to Rule 1.16."
D.Hearing: A hearing is not requested.
E.Expedited Consideration: Expedited consideration is not requested.
F.Supporting Material: RPC 1.16 (redline), RPC 1.13 (redline)
SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS TO RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT
RULES 1.16 AND 1.13
RPC 1.16 - DECLINING OR TERMINATING REPRESENTATION
(a) - (d) Unchanged.
Comment
[1] - [3] Unchanged.
[4] [Washington revision] A client has a right to discharge a lawyer at any time, with or without cause, subject to liability for payment for the lawyer's services. However, the rule may apply differently with respect to in-house lawyers and lawyers with comparable employment situations. See Karstetter v. King County Corrections Guild, 193 Wn.2d. 672, 444 P.3d 1185 (2019); Washington Comment [16] to Rule 1.13. Where future dispute about the withdrawal may be anticipated, it may be advisable to prepare a written statement reciting the circumstances.
RPC 1.13 - ORGANIZATION AS CLIENT
(a) - (h) Unchanged.
Comment
[1] - [14] Unchanged.
Additional Washington Comments [15-16]
[15] Unchanged.
[16] In-house lawyers and lawyers with comparable employment situations may face unique employment expectations that impact their rights if discharged by the client. See Karstetter v. King County Corrections Guild, 193 Wn.2d 672, 444 P.3d 1185 (2019); Comment [4] to Rule 1.16.