25 Id. The Court of Justice defined a non-recoverable levy as a flat fee representing the entire legal tax for services. 203 Ariz. 419, 7, 55 pp.31-762, 7. He reserved the conditions of “non-refundable retention” or “extended payment” for conventional or general storages paid to ensure the future availability of a lawyer. Id. 29 Ariz. R. Sup. Ct. 42, E.R. 1.5, comment 7; See also Ariz. R.

Sup. Ct. 42; E.R. 1.16 (d), “At the end of the representation, a lawyer takes steps to the extent reasonably possible to protect the client`s interests, such as appropriate disclosure to the client. B, the granting of time for the employment of another legal advisor, the handing over of documents and property to which the client is entitled, and the reimbursement of advances of an unearned sum. (Added highlight.) Scenario 1. Defense attorney X agrees to represent Client A in a DWI. The pricing agreement requires a non-refundable retention of $5,000, covering all legal services until trial. If a trial version is required, the agreement provides for a non-refundable “test fee” of $10,000. Customer A pays the first tax of $5,000, but is unable to pay the $10,000 if it is clear that a trial version will be required.

Lawyer X withdraws from the representation. Counsel Z`s fee agreement may be ethical as long as the initial non-refundable retention of $2,500 applies: (1) is not for legal services, (2) the amount is reasonable in the circumstances and (3) the lawyer may justify dropping or likely giving up if she represents other clients to represent clients C. Three separate taxes are not ineligible, although stacking costs can be problematic depending on nature and suitability. The non-refundable retention portion can be paid directly into the lawyer`s operating account, as it is earned after receipt. However, “non-refundable” storage services can also be refunded though. B, for example, the lawyer is dismissed for “cause” or is no longer available for client service. At least in theory, the amount of fees that counsel charges the client for the services provided should not affect the adequacy of the retainer of the undertaking. However, if the cumulative amounts charged for the retention of the shares and legal services are high and the lawyer can only provide a volatile statement of the benefit granted to the client in exchange for the retention of the commitment, the overall impression will be too high. Facts that apply to the relevance of a commitment retainor include: a detailed explanation of the retainer of the commitment in the pricing agreement; an audit of the fee agreement by the client`s independent advisor prior to the execution or the client`s recommendation to the client to have the fee agreement verified by independent advisors; and the client`s sophistication on legal issues in general and commitment retainers in particular. It is also useful if the client is rich and if he is the one who offers the engagement restraint.

Intervention media are dangerous in the wrong hands and are only suitable in certain circumstances. Too often, Colorado lawyers call the down payment of attorneys` fees as engagement guards, so they can afford something themselves before they`ve done any important legal work – in other words, it`ll be a signing bonus. They then treat the commitment allowance as compensation for the legal services to be provided in the future. Lawyers who wrongly characterize a down payment as engagement custody fees and then treat the money as their own risk are the presumed consequence of the disbarment. Lawyers who are not unaware of engagement knowledge should avoid them altogether. A true retainer is won (and therefore is not refundable) because it removes the lawyer from the market and prevents him from doing other legal work (. B for example, work that may conflict with this client).