Model Rule, joint representation in writingMD
Maryland fee division
Maryland numbers the rule 19-301.5, not 1.5. Two attorneys not in the same firm may divide a fee if the split matches the work or each takes joint responsibility, you agree to the joint representation in a writing, and the total is reasonable.
Last checked Sep 4, 2026 · LawyerUnc editorial. Educational only, not legal advice.
- The rule
- Md. Attorneys' R. Prof. Cond. 19-301.5(e)
- What you sign
- The client agrees to the joint representation and the agreement is confirmed in writing. The total fee is reasonable. Put each share in that writing even if the subsection's sentence is shorter than the ABA's.
- How the split is allowed
- Proportion to services, or each attorney assumes joint responsibility for the representation.
- Any cap on the referring share
- No Florida-style 25% cap. The total fee must be reasonable. Maryland contributory negligence is the crash page, not this rule.
- Who is not in the fee
- A nonlawyer does not take a percentage of the recovery. Hosting, ads, and software get a flat or metered bill. That is ABA Model Rule 5.4 in substance, and every state on this desk follows it.
For the lawyer on the other end
Cite 19-301.5(e), not 'Maryland 1.5(e).' The Title 19 numbering is what a Maryland grievance counsel will open.
The text says agreement to the joint representation, confirmed in writing. It does not copy the ABA 'including the share each lawyer will receive' clause. Put the shares in anyway.