Matter of Cooperman

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding non-refundable retainers prohibited by Code of Professional Responsibility, applying provisions materially the same as Arizona’s
• holding special nonrefundable retainer fee agreements are against public policy and transgressing the Code of Professional Responsibility
• holding that nonrefundable retainers are per se unethical
• “This unique fiduciary reb-anee, stemming from people hiring attorneys to exercise professional judgment on a client’s behalf—‘giving counsel’—is imbued with ultimate trust and confidence.”
• “[W]e hold that the use of a special nonrefundable retainer fee agreement clashes with public policy because it inappropriately compromises the right to sever the fiduciary services relationship with the lawyer.”
• “This unique fiduciary reliance ... is imbued with ultimate trust and confidence.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).