Malpractice Insurance Disclosure: WSBA Board to Consider Sending a Rule Proposal to the WA Supreme Court |
PROVIDE YOUR FEEDBACK TO THE WSBA BOARD OF GOVERNORS
At its September business meeting, the WSBA Board of Governors will consider whether to propose to the Washington Supreme Court a rule change that would require lawyers, with exceptions, to disclose to clients if they do not have malpractice insurance.
Specifically, the proposed addition to Rule of Professional Conduct (RPC) 1.4 would require practitioners who lack a minimum threshold of malpractice insurance to provide notice to and obtain consent from clients.
The disclosure/consent requirement would primarily apply to private practitioners who lack malpractice insurance coverage. Under the draft amendment, it would expressly not apply to judges, arbitrators and mediators not otherwise engaged in the practice of law, in-house counsel for a single entity, government lawyers practicing in that capacity, and employee lawyers of nonprofit legal services organizations or volunteer lawyers where the nonprofit entity provides malpractice insurance coverage at the minimum levels.
Specifically, the proposed addition to Rule of Professional Conduct (RPC) 1.4 would require practitioners who lack a minimum threshold of malpractice insurance to provide notice to and obtain consent from clients.
The disclosure/consent requirement would primarily apply to private practitioners who lack malpractice insurance coverage. Under the draft amendment, it would expressly not apply to judges, arbitrators and mediators not otherwise engaged in the practice of law, in-house counsel for a single entity, government lawyers practicing in that capacity, and employee lawyers of nonprofit legal services organizations or volunteer lawyers where the nonprofit entity provides malpractice insurance coverage at the minimum levels.
The board’s Committee to Investigate Alternatives to Mandatory Malpractice Insurance recommended the RPC amendment in August. The board formed this ad hoc committee in January 2020 after declining the previous year to support a task force’s recommendation to mandate malpractice insurance for most private practitioners. The board will take up the proposed amendment as an action item in September.
The Court is the only authority that can approve RPC amendments. If the WSBA Board of Governors votes to recommend this RPC amendment to the Court in September, the Court will likely follow its typical process of publicizing the proposal for public comment prior to a decision.
In the meantime, WSBA members and the public can provide feedback to the Board of Governors using this form prior to the September meeting and/or during the comment period at the meeting.