New at Point of Law: foiling dishonest lawyers

Over at Point of Law, Boston attorney Peter Morin and I have collaborated on a new column about a simple way to discourage bad-apple lawyers from exploiting vulnerable clients. …The simple fix is a rule that goes by the name “payee notification”. It would require insurance companies to notify a claimant when they forward a […]

Over at Point of Law, Boston attorney Peter Morin and I have collaborated on a new column about a simple way to discourage bad-apple lawyers from exploiting vulnerable clients.

…The simple fix is a rule that goes by the name “payee notification”. It would require insurance companies to notify a claimant when they forward a settlement check to claimant’s counsel. At a single stroke, the client is made aware of the timing and size of the settlement, taking away most of the leeway a dishonest lawyer has to withhold the client’s funds.

Several other states, including California, New York, and Connecticut, have already instituted payee-notification rules, and they have worked well. … So who would oppose it? Interesting that you should ask. …

One Comment

  • In most states like Maryland there is not really much a lawyer can do with a settlement check without the express authorizaion of the client and then is has to be deposited in an IOLTA account. I have never heard of anyone reporting a problem in this jurisdiction. But if it is a problem somewhere, then by all means, it couldn’t hurt although I would hope there was a three day lag time just so the client does not get the letter before the lawyer gets the check.