Overview of topics...

This is the second of a three-part series on the new Rule 137 that took effect on January 1, 2002, mandating the arbitration of attorney's fee disputes at the client's option and applying the rule in all, not just matrimonial actions. Part III will appear in SPR 119.

Treated in Part I in Issue 117

• Background
• Applicable Only Where Representation "Commenced" After January 1, 2002
• Bar Associations to Administer Program
• Where to Call for Guidance on Program Used Locally
• Management of the Program
• Governing Rules and Standards
• Applicable in All Civil Cases, Not Just Marital Actions
• Attorney's Duty to Inform Client of Arbitration Rights
• When Is There "Dispute" That Triggers Rule 137 Procedures?
• Attorney's Retaining Lien Exceptions in Which Rule 137 Doesn't Apply

Treated in Part II (in this Issue 118)

• The $1000 Threshold and the $50,000 Cap
• Statute of Limitations Issues
• Consent by Both Sides Is Universal Cure-All
• The Arbitral Panels
• Venue of the Arbitration
• The Procedure to Be Followed
• Lawyer's Non-Participation Invokes Grievance Procedure
• May Default Be Excused?
• Does CPLR Article 75 Apply to Fee Dispute Arbitrations?
• The Model Forms, Prescribed for Most Steps
• The Arbitration Hearing
• The Award

Treated in Part III in Issue 119

• No "Review" of Award: Trial de Novo Allowed Instead
• Procedure for Trial De Novo
• Any Other "Review" If Loser Does Not Seek Trial de Novo?
• Confidentiality
• Res Judicata and Collateral Estoppel Issues
• Enforcement of Award
• Which Court to Enter the Award In?
• Statutory Basis for Rule Allowing Direct Entry on Award
• Appointment of Pro Bono Attorney to Help Client Enforce Award
• Mediation Instead of Arbitration