Bar members discuss fee-sharing practice report.

• Date: 22 May 2002
• Author: Anderson, Tony

Byline: Tony Anderson

Supporters and opponents of a proposal to allow lawyers to share fees with professionals outside the field of law are using the same statement to support their positions. Both sides of the multidisciplinary practice (MDP) issue hold that their positions would be in the best interest of their clients.

The release of the State Bar MDP Commission's interim report, supporting Supreme Court Rules changes that would allow MDPs, spawned nearly three hours of discussion during an Assembly of Members meeting last week. The meeting allowed bar members to listen to commission members on both sides of the issue.

Throughout the meeting, supporters of the proposal to allow lawyers to partner with non-lawyers maintained the position that it would help attorneys provide more comprehensive services to their clients. Thus, they would be in a better position to meet their clients' needs.

At the same time, opponents of the rule change countered with the notion that clients received the best service when their attorney's loyalties were fully focused on the client. In a multidisciplinary partnership, they said, the attorney's loyalties would be divided between the client and partners, whose ethical considerations might conflict with the attorney's standard of ethics.

The discussion focused on the release of the MDP Commission's preliminary report during the State Bar annual conference. The commission, in a 12-8 vote, agreed to support the creation of MDPs, where Wisconsin lawyers could partner with professionals outside the legal community. However, the rules state that the lawyer must maintain majority ownership of such a venture.

The interim report also states that the MDP firm would be "organized and regulated to assure that lawyers maintain their independence of professional judgment." (See Fig. 1 for MDP recommendations)

Improve Public Perception

Gary L. Bakke, a past State...