End-of-life notice: American Legal Ethics Library
As of March 1, 2013, the Legal Information Institute is no longer maintaining the information in the American Legal Ethics Library. It is no longer possible for us to maintain it at a level of completeness and accuracy given its staffing needs. It is very possible that we will revive it at a future time. At this point, it is in need of a complete technological renovation and reworking of the "correspondent firm" model which successfully sustained it for many years.
Many people have contributed time and effort to the project over the years, and we would like to thank them. In particular, Roger Cramton and Peter Martin not only conceived ALEL but gave much of their own labor to it. We are also grateful to Brad Wendel for his editorial contributions, to Brian Toohey and all at Jones Day for their efforts, and to all of our correspondents and contributors. Thank you.
We regret any inconvenience.
Some portions of the collection may already be severely out of date, so please be cautious in your use of this material.
Pennsylvania Legal Ethics
1.17:100 Comparative Analysis of Pennsylvania Rule
MR 1.17 is not enacted in the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Responsibility. However, in at least one instance, the Committee has looked to guidance from MR 1.17. For example, Phila. Eth. Op. 96-1 (1996) addresses the issue of whether, under the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct, an attorney may sell his or her practice for a percentage of the revenue derived by the buyer attorney from the cases pursued on behalf of the seller's former clients over a five (5) year period. While the Committee acknowledged that there is no counterpart to MR 1.17 in Pennsylvania, it referred the inquirer to MR. 1.17 and stated: "Under the Model Rule, the sale of the practice would be permitted with certain limitations."
[The discussion of this topic has not yet been written.]