Skip to main content

Representation of Uninsured Motorist

Adopted: January 16, 1987

Opinion rules that a lawyer employed by an insurer to represent an uninsured motorist must not withdraw after settlement until he obtains permission of the tribunal and takes steps to minimize prejudice to his client [Originally published as RPC 8 (Revised)]

Editor's Note: This opinion was originally published as RPC 8 (Revised).


A was injured while sitting in a parked automobile struck by an automobile being driven by B and owned by C, who was a passenger. There was no insurance coverage on the vehicle being operated by B. A had uninsured motorist coverage with X insurance company. A brought an action against B and C, and X company employed attorney W to defend against A's action. Eventually, A and X company settled as between them, with X company taking an uninsured motorist release. X company wished to pursue its subrogation claim against B and C. The action was not dismissed and remains on the calendar.

X company has suggested that it employ A's original counsel to pursue the action on behalf of X company. Attorney W raised the question about his obligation to defend the action for B and C since he appears as attorney of record. X company does not appear as a party to the action in any of the pleadings. X company has suggested that Attorney W file a motion to withdraw as counsel and that he advise B and C that they can employ separate counsel at their own expense or go forth without representation. At no time has anyone advised B or C that such an action might be forthcoming. B and C were merely advised that X company would pay the expenses of Attorney W in the action brought by X company's insured against them as uninsured motorists.

May Attorney W ethically withdraw as suggested, giving B and C the advice they can employ their own counsel or go forth without representation? If not, what is his obligation?


A lawyer undertaking to represent individuals at the request of and at the expense of an insurance company should have had full discussion and understanding with the indi- vidual client concerning the fee and arrangements and the conditions upon the lawyer's representation of the client. See comment to Rule 2.6; Rule 5.6. Under no circumstances may Attorney W withdraw without complying with any rules of the tribunal and without taking reasonable steps to avoid foreseeable prejudice to B and C. See Rule 2.8 (a). Under these circumstances, Attorney W will have to discuss the situation with B and C to clarify their understanding of the basis upon which Attorney W agreed to represent them and to determine what prejudice might result from his withdrawal. Depending on the circumstances, including the potential prejudice to the clients and the terms of the agreement between Attorney W and the clients, Attorney W may ethically be required to continue representing B and C in order to insure that they do not suffer undue prejudice and in order to fulfill any obligations created by his representations to B and C concerning his appearing on their behalf.

Back to top