Paragraph (c) is nearly identical to Model Rule 1.8(c) (2002), with one substantive change.The Louisiana Rule excludes language found in the ABA Model Rule that attempts to sweep within the rule an unspecified class of relatives, namely, “other” relatives or individuals “with whom the lawyer or the client maintains a close, familial relationship.” The LSBA was concerned that this language was too indeterminate to give lawyers fair notice regarding which relatives are included within its scope.Instead, the ABA adopted language permitting such agreements when the client is independently represented.The ABA believed that there may be good reasons to permit a lawyer to limit liability prospectively and that the client is adequately protected when represented by independent counsel.Paragraph (h) is identical to Model Rule 1.8(h) (2002).As to prospective waivers, the ABA in 2002 deleted language in the former Model Rule allowing such agreements when “permitted by law.” It did so because it believed that the phrase had no significant role in addressing these conflicts.
Paragraph (e) diverges significantly from Model Rule 1.8(e). 1976), a case in which the Louisiana Supreme Court held that a lawyer may advance “minimal living expenses” to a client to prevent the client from being forced into accepting an unfavorable early settlement. Paragraph (f) is identical to Model Rule 1.8(f) (2002), except with the addition of the following language to subsection (i): “. Paragraph (g) is identical to Model Rule 1.8(g) (2002), except with the addition of language to address aggregate settlements in “certified class action[s].” The LSBA proposed this addition to relieve class-action lawyers of the obligation of obtaining signed writings from all members of a certified class in order to settle a class-action matter.With the informed consent of the client, the lawyer may charge as recoverable costs such items as computer legal research charges, long distance telephone expenses, postage charges, copying charges, mileage and outside courier service charges, incurred solely for the purposes of the representation undertaken for that client, provided they are charged at the lawyer’s actual, invoiced costs for these expenses.With client consent and where the lawyer’s fee is based upon an hourly rate, a reasonable charge for paralegal services may be chargeable to the client.Several states had specified that the consent refers to the essential terms of the transaction.Case law in some jurisdictions went further and required disclosure regarding the risks of the transaction.