Iddings v. McBurney
Docket: No. 96-582-Appeal
Court: Supreme Court of Rhode Island; March 12, 1998; Rhode Island; State Supreme Court
An appeal was made by plaintiffs Frederick T. Iddings, Jr. and Daniel J. Sheehan against a summary judgment favoring defendant John F. McBurney. The case originated from a fee-splitting agreement concerning legal representation for Arthur Pelley, who was injured in a gas explosion. After a failed settlement, Pelley was referred to McBurney, with the plaintiffs and McBurney agreeing to split the attorney's fee equally. Pelley acknowledged this arrangement in an affidavit but there was no formal agreement. McBurney settled the case for $420,000, deducted one-third as his fee, and offered the plaintiffs half of the remaining amount, which they rejected, subsequently suing for a greater share. The trial court found the fee-splitting arrangement illegal and granted summary judgment in favor of McBurney. In reviewing the summary judgment, the Supreme Court evaluated whether material facts were in dispute regarding the fee agreement under Rhode Island's Code of Professional Responsibility, specifically DR 2-107. It was determined that while the first and third requirements for permissible fee splitting were met, there were no findings on the proportionality of services and responsibilities among the attorneys. Therefore, material issues of fact remained unresolved. The Supreme Court concluded that the trial justice erred in granting summary judgment, sustained the plaintiffs' appeal, vacated the lower court's judgment, and remanded the case for trial. Justices Bourcier and Goldberg did not participate in the decision.