About

Kentucky Supreme Court Upholds 75% Breakup Fee in $Emery Law v. Franklin$

Published
Score
10

Why it matters

The Kentucky Supreme Court reversed a trial court decision and upheld a 75% fee-allocation clause in a law firm separation agreement, ruling that the provision does not violate ethics rules restricting lawyers' practice rights. In Emery Law Office, Inc. v. Joel Franklin, the court held 4-3 that the clause imposed no direct restriction on Franklin's ability to practice or accept clients. Justice Kelly Thompson's majority opinion distinguished the case from prior precedent requiring quantum meruit fee splits, finding that a negotiated separation agreement should be enforced under contract principles rather than automatic fee-division rules.

The dispute arose when Franklin left Emery Law Office to start his own practice and took clients with him. The trial court had initially ruled in Franklin's favor, relying on Baker v. Shapero, which mandates quantum meruit allocation when no valid agreement exists between successive counsel. The Kentucky Supreme Court limited Baker to disputes between unaffiliated lawyers without a governing agreement, holding that valid negotiated separation agreements control instead.

The narrow 4-3 split signals that Kentucky will enforce fee-allocation clauses in attorney separation agreements provided they do not function as practice restrictions and client choice remains intact. Firms seeking to protect contingency-matter fees through departure agreements now have a clearer path to enforcement, though the decision's thinness leaves room for future challenges if similar clauses are characterized as penalties for leaving. Attorneys negotiating firm separations should expect these provisions to be enforceable under Kentucky law, assuming the agreement does not operate as a de facto practice restriction.

Sources

mail Subscribe to Contract Negotiation email updates

Primary sources. No fluff. Straight to your inbox.

Also on LawSnap