# Consequences of switching outside counsel[^about]
Consequences of switching outside counsel, including active matters, file return, privilege, AI-forward transitions, delays, and unpaid bills.
## Can a company switch outside counsel during an active matter? {#can-company-switch-outside-counsel-active-matter}
**Short answer.** Yes, but the switch must be managed as a termination and transition process, not just a new engagement. The company may choose counsel, while old counsel still has duties around notice, court approval when required, file delivery, refunds, and limited transition knowledge.
The national baseline is still ordinary professional-responsibility law. `ABA Model Rule 1.16(d)` says that on termination a lawyer must "take steps to the extent reasonably practicable to protect a client's interests"[^american-bar-association-model-rule-1-16-d], including reasonable notice, time to obtain other counsel, surrender of papers and property, and refund of any advance payment not earned or incurred. [^american-bar-association-model-rule-1-16-d] Recent ethics opinions make the same point in more operational language. New York City says firms and departing lawyers must assure an "orderly transition"[^new-york-city-bar-association-formal-opinion-202]. North Carolina says affected clients "must be notified"[^north-carolina-state-bar-2025-formal-ethics-opin]. Tennessee is skeptical of notice periods that operate less like administration and more like restraints on client choice. [^new-york-city-bar-association-formal-opinion-202][^north-carolina-state-bar-2025-formal-ethics-opin][^tennessee-board-of-professional-responsibility-o]
That right to switch is not the same as a right to disappear from a live case. `Model Rule 1.16(c)` requires continued representation when a tribunal orders it. The Southern and Eastern Districts of New York make the point more bluntly: counsel "may be relieved or displaced only by order of the court"[^sdny-and-edny-joint-local-rules]. California's Rule 3.1362 and the Northern District's local rules run the same way in slightly different procedural language. [^american-bar-association-model-rule-1-16-d][^sdny-and-edny-joint-local-rules][^judicial-branch-of-california-rule-3-1362][^northern-district-of-california-civil-local-rule] The consequence is practical rather than theoretical. A company that changes firms mid-case is running the business timeline, the court's timeline, and the outgoing firm's exit obligations at the same time. Client choice is clear. Timing is not.
Fee cleanup and transition knowledge sit in the same legal event. Unused advances and unincurred costs still belong back on termination. [^american-bar-association-model-rule-1-16-d] And the handoff is not always complete when the files move. `ABA Formal Opinion 520` says former counsel may still have to convey matter knowledge learned during the representation when that information is unavailable elsewhere and important to protecting the client in the same matter, though former counsel need not create new work product or keep doing the job. [^american-bar-association-formal-opinion-520] That is probably the cleanest current answer to the recurring mid-deal problem: the folder often moves faster than the context.
- How much notice can an incumbent firm require before departure? The administrative argument is real, but New York and Tennessee resist turning notice periods into de facto restraints on client choice. Perhaps the durable line is not `notice` versus `no notice`, but flexible notice versus restrictive notice. [^new-york-city-bar-association-formal-opinion-202][^tennessee-board-of-professional-responsibility-o]
- Mid-deal transitions still look more operational than doctrinal. The source set did not surface a general national rule equivalent to the litigation withdrawal rules for ongoing transactions. Perhaps the harder disputes will keep turning on completeness, closing mechanics, and opinion-letter dependencies rather than on any general prohibition on switching firms. [^american-bar-association-formal-opinion-520][^ilta-offboarding-managing-the-challenge-of-attor][^association-of-legal-administrators-best-practic]
## What files must old counsel give a company after switching firms? {#what-files-old-counsel-must-give-successor}
**Short answer.** The answer depends on state law, but the baseline is broad access to materials needed for the representation. New York is especially file-access oriented, while retaining-lien leverage varies sharply across states.
File access is broad in principle and state-specific in scope. California requires prompt release of "all client materials and property"[^state-bar-of-california-rule-1-16-e-1], including items reasonably necessary to the client's representation. [^state-bar-of-california-rule-1-16-e-1][^state-bar-of-texas-rule-1-15-d][^the-florida-bar-rule-4-1-16-d] New York's `Sage Realty` decision is the broad-access anchor because it adopted an `entire file` presumption for the client, including paid-for work product, subject to narrow exceptions. [^sage-realty-corp-v-proskauer-rose-goetz-mendelso][^new-york-state-bar-association-ethics-opinion-76] Virginia has moved the other direction on retaining liens, saying the old common-law lien is overruled by Rule 1.16(e). D.C. still recognizes only a narrow unpaid-work-product exception and describes retaining liens on client files as "strongly disfavored"[^d-c-bar-ethics-opinion-250]. [^virginia-state-bar-ethics-and-conduct-materials][^virginia-state-bar-rules-of-professional-conduct][^virginia-legal-ethics-opinion-1690][^d-c-bar-ethics-opinion-250][^d-c-bar-ethics-opinion-372][^d-c-bar-ethics-opinion-333]
Published law-firm commentary is more convergent than adversarial. Pullman & Comley says the departure rules start from the proposition that clients are not property, and it favors a joint notice with a client ballot showing whether the matter stays, follows, or goes elsewhere. The same firm also says the incumbent should not cut the departing lawyer off from the files, email, or court-filing systems needed to protect current matters during the notice period. [^pullman-comley-risk-managers-alert-ethical-oblig][^pullman-comley-law-firm-breakups-and-lawyer-depa]
Dentons adds the other side of that same point: before client direction is clear, a departing lawyer should not copy or remove matter files unilaterally. The Michigan bar's 2025 ethics article is blunter about delay after the client decides. It says there is "no ethical basis for delay"[^state-bar-of-michigan-ethical-duties-of-a-law-fi] and that holding files hostage is impermissible. [^dentons-how-associates-can-ethically-move-to-a-n][^state-bar-of-michigan-ethical-duties-of-a-law-fi][^michigan-state-bar-changing-firms-guide]
Yankwitt's New York litigation commentary is where the consensus narrows. It agrees that the client chooses. Its point is that retaining liens can still leave successor counsel facing summary-judgment or trial deadlines without the file. So the disagreement in the firm layer is not over whether a company may switch. It is over how much leverage the old firm still has once bills go unpaid in a retaining-lien jurisdiction. [^yankwitt-llp-best-practices-when-picking-up-a-ca]
- How broad is the client file at the digital margins? `Sage Realty` points toward an entire-file presumption, but D.C. materials still reflect narrower end-product instincts and unpaid-work-product exceptions. The corroborated source set does not yield a nationally settled answer for every digital artifact created during a matter. [^sage-realty-corp-v-proskauer-rose-goetz-mendelso][^d-c-bar-ethics-opinion-250][^d-c-bar-ethics-opinion-372]
- When does nonpayment justify withholding? Virginia and D.C. narrow that power considerably. New York still gives the old firm materially more leverage in some pending matters. So the same unpaid invoice can be a cleanup issue in one state and a real transition blocker in another. [^virginia-state-bar-ethics-and-conduct-materials][^d-c-bar-ethics-opinion-250][^yankwitt-llp-best-practices-when-picking-up-a-ca]
## Does switching outside counsel waive privilege when matter files move? {#does-switching-outside-counsel-waive-privilege}
**Short answer.** Usually no, but privilege can be damaged by poor transfer controls. The risk is not the substitution itself; it is who receives the data, how it moves, and whether confidentiality safeguards are defensible.
The privilege point is narrower than the market rhetoric. Changing firms does not itself waive privilege. The live question is transfer method. `Model Rule 1.6(b)(7)` permits limited disclosures for conflicts only if they do not "compromise the attorney-client privilege or otherwise prejudice the client"[^american-bar-association-model-rule-1-6]. `Model Rule 1.6(c)` separately requires reasonable efforts to prevent unauthorized access or disclosure, and `ABA Formal Opinion 477R` applies the same logic to electronic transmission. [^american-bar-association-model-rule-1-6][^american-bar-association-comment-on-rule-1-6][^american-bar-association-formal-opinion-477r] The law is technology-neutral. It is not process-neutral.
The third consequence is that privilege usually survives the substitution but can still be damaged by sloppy transfer architecture. The weak points are overbroad exports, insecure transmission, unclear client authority, and moving material before conflicts and access rights are resolved. `Model Rule 1.6` and `477R` make that a facts-and-process inquiry rather than a paper-versus-digital inquiry. [^american-bar-association-model-rule-1-6][^american-bar-association-formal-opinion-477r] For companies moving to tech-forward counsel, that means the legal question is rarely whether the new firm uses AI. It is who can see the matter data, what systems touch it, and whether those systems sit inside a defensible confidentiality boundary.
## Why can switching to AI-forward counsel still slow legal work? {#why-ai-forward-counsel-switch-can-slow-work}
**Short answer.** Because the transition remains a legal handoff before it becomes a technology improvement. AI-forward counsel may speed later workflows, but the first move still requires client approval, file transfer controls, metadata mapping, and recovery of context that may not be in the file.
The market pressure behind these transitions is real. A March 2026 Thomson Reuters Institute summary said more than half of surveyed corporate legal professionals believe outside firms should use AI on their matters, and an October 2025 ACC survey described a transparency gap over whether outside counsel are using AI at all. [^thomson-reuters-the-great-ai-disconnect][^association-of-corporate-counsel-generative-ai-s] Reuters put the alternative legal services market at `$28.5 billion` in January 2025, while Bloomberg Law and TechCrunch described firms like Crosby as selling speed and workflow redesign rather than only hourly staffing. [^reuters-alternative-legal-services-market-reache][^bloomberg-law-ai-powered-law-firms-test-the-boun][^techcrunch-sequoia-backed-crosby-launches-a-new] That enlarges the set of plausible successor firms. It does not change the transition rules.
The first consequence is that a counsel change is not a vendor swap. Companies that budget only for file delivery are budgeting only for the easy half. ILTA's offboarding materials emphasize documented client approval, controlled transfer procedures, and audit trails about what moved. ALA's guidance says the transition period has to cover notice, matters staying behind, and permission to transfer the ones that are leaving. [^ilta-offboarding-managing-the-challenge-of-attor-2][^ilta-p2p-summer22-file-transfer-article][^association-of-legal-administrators-best-practic-2] A mailbox export, a diligence-room zip file, or a stack of PDFs can be enough to prove transfer happened and still not be enough for successor counsel to act at the same speed.
The fourth consequence is that the near-term effect can be slower even when the long-term goal is faster. Tech-forward firms sell shorter cycle times. But the first transition often requires successor counsel to rebuild playbooks, map metadata, and recover context that never made it into the file. `Formal Opinion 520` matters here precisely because it recognizes that an orderly handoff can require more than document delivery when material knowledge exists only in the old team. [^american-bar-association-formal-opinion-520-2][^ilta-offboarding-managing-the-challenge-of-attor-2][^association-of-legal-administrators-best-practic-2] Companies that switch firms for workflow speed often discover that the transition itself is a legal operation first and a tooling project second.
-
## What happens if old counsel withholds files after unpaid bills? {#what-happens-if-old-firm-withholds-file}
**Short answer.** The answer is highly state-specific. New York may give old counsel more leverage through a retaining lien, while Virginia and D.C. narrow that leverage and treat client-protection duties as the controlling concern.
The second consequence is timing compression. In a live case, the business deadline, the court's deadline, and the outgoing firm's duty not to prejudice the client all continue at once. [^american-bar-association-model-rule-1-16-d-2][^sdny-and-edny-joint-local-rules-2] If the last bill is disputed, the switch can turn into two matters: the underlying deal or case, and a second fight over access to the file or security for unpaid fees. That second fight is much sharper in New York than in Virginia or D.C., which means the same transition can be mostly administrative in one state and strategically expensive in another. [^sage-realty-corp-v-proskauer-rose-goetz-mendelso-2][^virginia-state-bar-ethics-and-conduct-materials-2][^d-c-bar-ethics-opinion-250-2][^yankwitt-llp-best-practices-when-picking-up-a-ca-2]
[^about]: By Steven Obiajulu, J.D. Published by [openagreements.org](https://openagreements.org). Last reviewed 2026-04-20. License: CC BY 4.0. Steven Obiajulu, J.D. edits this topic article for Federal + multi-state coverage. It synthesizes legal sources and is not legal advice. This article is for informational purposes only and does not create an attorney-client relationship.
[^american-bar-association-model-rule-1-16-d]: **American Bar Association, Model Rule 1.16(d)** — "take steps to the extent reasonably practicable to protect a client's interests" *American Bar Association, Model Rule 1.16(d).*
[^new-york-city-bar-association-formal-opinion-202]: **New York City Bar Association, Formal Opinion 2023-1** — "orderly transition" *New York City Bar Association, Formal Opinion 2023-1.*
[^north-carolina-state-bar-2025-formal-ethics-opin]: **North Carolina State Bar, 2025 Formal Ethics Opinion 1** — "must be notified" *North Carolina State Bar, 2025 Formal Ethics Opinion 1.*
[^tennessee-board-of-professional-responsibility-o]: **Tennessee Board of Professional Responsibility, Opinion 2023-F-169** — "Departing lawyers and their law firms have an ethical duty to protect client interests when a lawyer leaves a law firm." *Tennessee Board of Professional Responsibility, Opinion 2023-F-169.*
[^sdny-and-edny-joint-local-rules]: **SDNY and EDNY Joint Local Rules** — "may be relieved or displaced only by order of the court" *SDNY and EDNY Joint Local Rules.*
[^judicial-branch-of-california-rule-3-1362]: **Judicial Branch of California, Rule 3.1362** — "A notice of motion and motion to be relieved as counsel under Code of Civil Procedure section 284(2) must be directed to the client and must be made on the Notice of Motion and Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil (form MC-051)." *Judicial Branch of California, Rule 3.1362.*
[^northern-district-of-california-civil-local-rule]: **Northern District of California, Civil Local Rules** — "Failure by counsel or a party to comply with any duly promulgated local rule or any Federal Rule may be a ground for imposition of any authorized sanction." *Northern District of California, Civil Local Rules.*
[^american-bar-association-formal-opinion-520]: **American Bar Association, Formal Opinion 520** — "there are limited situations where a lawyer must comply with requests for information from successor counsel or a former client." *American Bar Association, Formal Opinion 520.*
[^ilta-offboarding-managing-the-challenge-of-attor]: **ILTA, Offboarding: Managing the Challenge of Attorney Exits** — "a typical offboarding request for file transfers necessitates the checks and balances scrutiny of a risk partner or general counsel (GC) to ensure the firm is meeting its ethical obligation." *ILTA, Offboarding: Managing the Challenge of Attorney Exits.*
[^association-of-legal-administrators-best-practic]: **Association of Legal Administrators, Best Practices for Integrating New Attorneys and Departing Attorneys** — "MUST COMPLY WITH OBLIGATION TO PROVIDE CLIENT FILES TO NEW LAW FIRM UPON CLIENT REQUEST" *Association of Legal Administrators, Best Practices for Integrating New Attorneys and Departing Attorneys.*
[^state-bar-of-california-rule-1-16-e-1]: **State Bar of California, Rule 1.16(e)(1)** — "all client materials and property" *State Bar of California, Rule 1.16(e)(1).*
[^state-bar-of-texas-rule-1-15-d]: **State Bar of Texas, Rule 1.15(d)** — "A lawyer shall not enter into a business transaction with a client, or knowingly acquire an ownership, possessory, security or other pecuniary interest adverse to a client, unless: (1) the terms of the transaction or acquisition are fair and reasonable to the client" *State Bar of Texas, Rule 1.15(d).*
[^the-florida-bar-rule-4-1-16-d]: **The Florida Bar, Rule 4-1.16(d)** — "A lawyer must not reveal information relating to representation of a client except as stated in subdivisions (b), (c), and (d), unless the client gives informed consent." *The Florida Bar, Rule 4-1.16(d).*
[^sage-realty-corp-v-proskauer-rose-goetz-mendelso]: **Sage Realty Corp. v. Proskauer Rose Goetz & Mendelsohn LLP, 91 N.Y.2d 30 (1997)** — "Affording the client presumptive access to the attorney's entire file on the represented matter, subject to narrow exceptions, is also supported, although not necessarily dictated, by the lawyer's ethical obligations arising out of representation in a given matter." *Sage Realty Corp. v. Proskauer Rose Goetz & Mendelsohn LLP, 91 N.Y.2d 30 (1997).*
[^new-york-state-bar-association-ethics-opinion-76]: **New York State Bar Association Ethics Opinion 766** — "Former client and/or successor counsel is presumptively entitled to access all attorney files." *New York State Bar Association Ethics Opinion 766.*
[^d-c-bar-ethics-opinion-250]: **D.C. Bar Ethics Opinion 250** — "strongly disfavored" *D.C. Bar Ethics Opinion 250.*
[^virginia-state-bar-ethics-and-conduct-materials]: **Virginia State Bar, Ethics and Conduct materials** — "A lawyer may not charge an hourly fee in excess of the time actually spent on the case and may not bill for time saved by using generative AI." *Virginia State Bar, Ethics and Conduct materials.*
[^virginia-state-bar-rules-of-professional-conduct]: **Virginia State Bar Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1.16** — "A lawyer who has formerly represented a client in a matter shall not thereafter represent another person in the same or a substantially related matter in which that person's interests are materially adverse to the interests of the former client" *Virginia State Bar Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1.16.*
[^virginia-legal-ethics-opinion-1690]: **Virginia Legal Ethics Opinion 1690** — "This compendium opinion expresses the sense of the Committee that the lawyers= retaining lien, though recognized at common law, is not ethically permissible whenever its assertion would prejudice or imperil Athe continued protection of a client=s interests.@" *Virginia Legal Ethics Opinion 1690.*
[^d-c-bar-ethics-opinion-372]: **D.C. Bar Ethics Opinion 372** — "The paramount principle governing the ethical obligations of a law firm and its members in connection with the process of dissolving the firm is that the law firm and its members must continue to competently, zealously and diligently represent and communicate with the clients during the dissolution process." *D.C. Bar Ethics Opinion 372.*
[^d-c-bar-ethics-opinion-333]: **D.C. Bar Ethics Opinion 333** — "Upon the termination of representation, an attorney is required to surrender to a client, to the client’s legal representative, or to a successor in interest the entire ‘file’ containing the papers and property to which the client is entitled." *D.C. Bar Ethics Opinion 333.*
[^pullman-comley-risk-managers-alert-ethical-oblig]: **Pullman & Comley commentary** — "a departing lawyer ‘should communicate with all clients with whom [he or she] has had significant client contact that the lawyer intends to change firms.’" *Pullman & Comley, Risk Managers' Alert: Ethical Obligations for Firms and Departing Lawyers.*
[^pullman-comley-law-firm-breakups-and-lawyer-depa]: **Pullman & Comley commentary** — "Virtually all courts and ethics bodies have concluded that a departing lawyer is permitted— prior to departure—to notify his or her clients of an imminent move from the firm." *Pullman & Comley, Law Firm Breakups and Lawyer Departures: The Ethical Dos and Don'ts.*
[^state-bar-of-michigan-ethical-duties-of-a-law-fi]: **State Bar of Michigan, Ethical duties of a law firm when a lawyer leaves** — "no ethical basis for delay" *State Bar of Michigan, Ethical duties of a law firm when a lawyer leaves.*
[^dentons-how-associates-can-ethically-move-to-a-n]: **Dentons commentary** — "These are cookies that are required for the operation of our website and use of its features, and therefore cannot be switched off in our systems." *Dentons, How Associates Can Ethically Move to a New Law Firm.*
[^michigan-state-bar-changing-firms-guide]: **Michigan State Bar, Changing Firms Guide** — "In summary, clients do not in any sense belong to a firm, and each client has the right to decide for themselves which lawyer or lawyers they wish to handle their affairs." *Michigan State Bar, Changing Firms Guide.*
[^yankwitt-llp-best-practices-when-picking-up-a-ca]: **Yankwitt LLP commentary** — "a lawyer discharged without cause is entitled to a common law retaining lien on the client’s file in the lawyer’s possession as security for compensation and is entitled to recover the fair and reasonable value of the services rendered as a condition of releasing the file." *Yankwitt LLP, Best Practices When Picking Up a Case from Prior Counsel.*
[^american-bar-association-model-rule-1-6]: **American Bar Association, Model Rule 1.6** — "compromise the attorney-client privilege or otherwise prejudice the client" *American Bar Association, Model Rule 1.6.*
[^american-bar-association-comment-on-rule-1-6]: **American Bar Association, Comment on Rule 1.6** — "A fundamental principle in the client-lawyer relationship is that, in the absence of the client's informed consent, the lawyer must not reveal information relating to the representation." *American Bar Association, Comment on Rule 1.6.*
[^american-bar-association-formal-opinion-477r]: **American Bar Association, Formal Opinion 477R** — "A lawyer generally may transmit information relating to the representation of a client over the internet without violating the Model Rules of Professional Conduct where the lawyer has undertaken reasonable efforts to prevent inadvertent or unauthorized access." *American Bar Association, Formal Opinion 477R.*
[^thomson-reuters-the-great-ai-disconnect]: **Thomson Reuters, The great AI disconnect** — "Most corporate legal professionals do not know whether their outside legal counsel are using AI in handling their client matters, leaving both law departments and their firms in a state of AI uncertainty." *Thomson Reuters, The great AI disconnect.*
[^association-of-corporate-counsel-generative-ai-s]: **Association of Corporate Counsel, Generative AI's Growing Strategic Value for Corporate Law Departments** — "Our findings reveal a decisive shift from passive planning to active implementation, with the in-house legal community moving swiftly to integrate this technology into their daily work." *Association of Corporate Counsel, Generative AI's Growing Strategic Value for Corporate Law Departments.*
[^reuters-alternative-legal-services-market-reache]: **Reuters, Alternative legal services market reaches $28.5 bln, report says** — "The market for legal services that are not performed by traditional law firms has hit a record $28.5 billion" *Reuters, Alternative legal services market reaches $28.5 bln, report says.*
[^bloomberg-law-ai-powered-law-firms-test-the-boun]: **Bloomberg Law, AI-Powered Law Firms Test the Bounds of Legal Work by Robots** — "The definition of the practice of law varies by jurisdiction, and how AI use affects that is a developing issue." *Bloomberg Law, AI-Powered Law Firms Test the Bounds of Legal Work by Robots.*
[^techcrunch-sequoia-backed-crosby-launches-a-new]: **TechCrunch, Sequoia-backed Crosby launches a new kind of AI-powered law firm** — "Crosby is an actual law firm using AI to provide legal services at a speed never before possible." *TechCrunch, Sequoia-backed Crosby launches a new kind of AI-powered law firm.*
[^ilta-offboarding-managing-the-challenge-of-attor-2]: **ILTA, Offboarding: Managing the Challenge of Attorney Exits** — "a typical offboarding request for file transfers necessitates the checks and balances scrutiny of a risk partner or general counsel (GC) to ensure the firm is meeting its ethical obligation." *ILTA, Offboarding: Managing the Challenge of Attorney Exits.*
[^ilta-p2p-summer22-file-transfer-article]: **ILTA, P2P Summer22 file-transfer article** — "IT directors and records managers increasingly recognize the inefficiencies and risk of human error involved in continuing to handle client file transfers manually." *ILTA, P2P Summer22 file-transfer article.*
[^association-of-legal-administrators-best-practic-2]: **Association of Legal Administrators, Best Practices for Integrating New Attorneys and Departing Attorneys** — "MUST COMPLY WITH OBLIGATION TO PROVIDE CLIENT FILES TO NEW LAW FIRM UPON CLIENT REQUEST" *Association of Legal Administrators, Best Practices for Integrating New Attorneys and Departing Attorneys.*
[^american-bar-association-formal-opinion-520-2]: **American Bar Association, Formal Opinion 520** — "there are limited situations where a lawyer must comply with requests for information from successor counsel or a former client." *American Bar Association, Formal Opinion 520.*
[^american-bar-association-model-rule-1-16-d-2]: **American Bar Association, Model Rule 1.16(d)** — "take steps to the extent reasonably practicable to protect a client's interests" *American Bar Association, Model Rule 1.16(d).*
[^sdny-and-edny-joint-local-rules-2]: **SDNY and EDNY Joint Local Rules** — "may be relieved or displaced only by order of the court" *SDNY and EDNY Joint Local Rules.*
[^sage-realty-corp-v-proskauer-rose-goetz-mendelso-2]: **Sage Realty Corp. v. Proskauer Rose Goetz & Mendelsohn LLP, 91 N.Y.2d 30 (1997)** — "Affording the client presumptive access to the attorney's entire file on the represented matter, subject to narrow exceptions, is also supported, although not necessarily dictated, by the lawyer's ethical obligations arising out of representation in a given matter." *Sage Realty Corp. v. Proskauer Rose Goetz & Mendelsohn LLP, 91 N.Y.2d 30 (1997).*
[^virginia-state-bar-ethics-and-conduct-materials-2]: **Virginia State Bar, Ethics and Conduct materials** — "A lawyer may not charge an hourly fee in excess of the time actually spent on the case and may not bill for time saved by using generative AI." *Virginia State Bar, Ethics and Conduct materials.*
[^d-c-bar-ethics-opinion-250-2]: **D.C. Bar Ethics Opinion 250** — "strongly disfavored" *D.C. Bar Ethics Opinion 250.*
[^yankwitt-llp-best-practices-when-picking-up-a-ca-2]: **Yankwitt LLP commentary** — "a lawyer discharged without cause is entitled to a common law retaining lien on the client’s file in the lawyer’s possession as security for compensation and is entitled to recover the fair and reasonable value of the services rendered as a condition of releasing the file." *Yankwitt LLP, Best Practices When Picking Up a Case from Prior Counsel.*