Improper Handling of Client Trust Accounts
Ethics
Managing money is always tricky, especially when it belongs to someone elseThat's why, in 2006 alone, more than 20 lawyers found themselves before the State of Michigan Attorney Discipline Board after having grievances filed against them for mismanagement of their clients' funds.
However, in Michigan, there is an infrastructure in place that allows attorneys to insulate themselves from the consequences of accounting errors - both accidental and otherwise.
Specifically, Michigan Rule of Professional Conduct (MRPC) 1.15 provides guidelines for the two types of client accounts: Interest on Lawyers Trust Accounts (IOLTAs) and non-IOLTAs.
The rule defines an IOLTA as "an interest or dividend bearing account" that "shall include only client or third person funds that cannot earn income for the client or third person in excess of the costs incurred to secure such income while the funds are held."
Though interest is earned on this type of account, the client does not receive those proceeds. Instead, the interest is paid to the Michigan Bar Foundation.
Conversely, a non-IOLTA under MRPC 1.15 also earns interests or dividends, however, that "net interest or dividend will be paid to the client."
MRPC 1.15 applies to both pooled and individual client trust accounts. But, because "it is common for a lawyer only to maintain one pooled client trust account," said Professor Lawrence A. Dubin - who teaches Professional Responsibility at the University of Detroit School of Law - IOLTAs, rather
than non-IOLTAs, may be easier for attorneys to work with.
However, that doesn't mean that IOLTA administration is without its own pitfalls.
In fact, with penalties ranging from a slap on the wrist to a permanent loss of license, learning the ins and outs of proper client trust management is fast becoming an integral part of effective practice management.
Related listings
-
Lawyer to be Suspended Over Conduct
Ethics 04/03/2008The former head of the Wayne County, MI Prosecutor Office's drug unit will be suspended with pay Friday and now faces an investigation that could lead to criminal charges for her actions in a 2005 cocaine case.Prosecutor Kym Worthy, in a prepar...
-
DOJ Presses Bribery Case
Ethics 04/02/2008A US Department of Justice spokesman said Monday that the department would continue to press its bribery case against Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA) despite the US Supreme Court's refusal to review an appeals court ruling that held the FBI's conduct d...
-
New Hampshire Adopts Rule for Clients Who Email
Ethics 03/28/2008New Hampshire adopted a rule that clearly protects persons who, in good faith, e-mail confidential information to a lawyer from having the lawyer use the information against the prospective client. The comments to New Hampshshire Rule 1.18 prov...
Texas Adopts Statewide Texting-While-Driving Ban
Effective September 1, 2017, Texas will become the 47th state to pass a statewide ban on texting while driving. Governor Abbott’s signing of House Bill 62 is an effort to unify Texas under a uniform ban and remedy the “patchwork quilt of regulations that dictate driving practices in Texas.”
The bill specifically prohibits drivers from reading, writing, or sending an electronic message on a device unless the vehicle is stopped. That includes texting and emailing. It does not, however, prohibit dialing a number to call someone, talking on the phone using a hands-free device, or using the phone’s GPS system.
Violations would be punishable by a fine ranging from $25 to $99, to be set by each municipality. Although penalties could rise to as much as $200 for repeat offenders.
Studies have found that a driver’s reaction time is half as much when a driver is distracted by sending or reading a text message. According to state officials, in 2015 more than 105,000 traffic accidents in Texas involved distracted driving, leading to at least 476 fatalities.