California Court of Appeal

In a law firm's suit to enforce a fee-splitting agreement against another law firm, arising from an underlying class action, trial court's judgment in favor of the defendant-law firm is reversed where an attorney may be equitably estopped from claiming that a fee-sharing contract is unenforceable due to noncompliance with rule 2-200 or rule 3.769, where that attorney is responsible for such noncompliance and has unfairly prevent another lawyer from complying with the rules' mandates.

Appellate Information

• Decided 12/19/2012
• Published 12/19/2012

Judges

• Ikola

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel