Ethics Forum: Questions and Answers on Professional Responsibility
I have heard in ethics seminars about qualified and nonqualified funds. I am not sure what they mean. Can you tell me?
February 02, 2023 at 11:13 AM
7 minute read
Ethics
Qualified funds must go into an IOLTA account and nonqualified funds must be put into an interest-bearing escrow account.
I have heard in ethics seminars about qualified and nonqualified funds. I am not sure what they mean. Can you tell me?
Chester County lawyer Samuel C. Stretton. Courtesy photo
The question of what are qualified funds and what are not is fairly straightforward. The bottom line is that qualified funds have to be put in ones IOLTA account. Nonqualified funds cannot be put in the IOLTA account, but must be put in an interest-bearing escrow account. The definitions are found at Rule 1.15(a)(8) and (a)(9) of the Rules of Professional Conduct. Qualified funds are defined as follows, "Funds which are nominal in amount or are reasonably expected to be held for such a short period of time that sufficient income will not be generated to justify the expense of administering a segregated account." See Rule 1.15(a)(9) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Matt's Corner: Pa.R.D.E. 217—Obligations of a Formerly Admitted Attorney
2 minute read
Pa. High Court's Revision of Rule 7.1 Tightens Previous Guidance on Firm Names
6 minute read
If You Are Too 'Busy' to Communicate With Your Client, You Better Think Again
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Semiconductor Component Maker Accused of Deceiving Investors About Market Downturn, Export Curbs
- 2Zuckerman Spaeder Gets Ready to Move Offices in DC, Deploy AI Tools in 2025
- 3Pardoning Jan. 6 Defendants May Send Bad Message About Insurrection, Rule of Law
- 4Looming Clash Over Abortion Pills Shows Overturning 'Roe v. Wade' Settled Nothing
- 53rd Circuit Strikes Down NLRB’s Monetary Remedies for Fired Starbucks Workers
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
