Great entry! Fascinating!!

One thing that is interesting is that Honest Abe’s $500 fee in 1836 becomes $9,434 in 2003 dollars. He’s still a bargain.

Using: http://oregonstate.edu/Dept/pol_sci/fac/sahr/cv2003.pdf

And as far as his desire to convey strong emotions with words, I think he clearly accomplished that at Gettysburg.

I knew you weren’t suggesting disbarring Abe.  Sometimes, hyperbole (especially the humorous type) is difficult to transmit in writing — and I try not to use too many emoticons.
 
The courts were purportedly protecting clients in equity mode prior to codified rules for lawyers.  The Model Code’s Canon on fees was first set down, I believe, in about 1908, and was basically adopted intact by the Model Rules folks (in the 1970s?).  My understanding is that the profession was facing threats of more statutory regulation when they decided to try some Model Rules and more explicit self-regulation.  Some of this history can be found in Brickman’s recent article, The Continuing Assault on the Citadel of Fiduciary Protection: Ethics 2000’s Revision of Model Rule 1.5 (2003 U.Ill.L.Rev. 1181 [Number 5]) around p. 1197.  More I shall not ferret today.

Did I say anything about disbarring Honest Abe??? NO WAY!! I was just trying to figure out how he calculated the amount he billed people.

Your point about how value billing is defined is well taken. All I have heard is that it represents the value to the client. I have no idea how to measure that or how to set a fee with that in mind.

It does not appear that Honest Abe used an hourly billing format. I wondered how his charges compared to what people earned. I tried to see if I could find out was per capita income was in 1850, but that information does not appear to have been tracked in the census then. I did stumble onto the fact that wage rates were tracked in 1850, but I could not find out what those rates were. I’ll let you know if I uncover any further information.

I did also wonder whether lawyers of Honest Abe’s time were governed by the same type of ethical rules or guidelines and what they said about fees. Maybe I’ll look into that when I get more time. My guess is that there may not have been rules, but there were probably standards. I would also guess that those standards have probably changed over time.

Thanks again for a thought-provoking post!
Ann M. Byrne

Ann, if somebody would help me understand what “value billing” means (other than a fancy slogan to hide a rate increase) when done by lawyers, it would be a lot easier to attempt an answer.
I’m pretty sure you don’t want a deeply serious response.  However, you’re right that it’s hard to tell how Lincoln was billing — the “value” and the reasonableness are in the particulars of each case and client situation.  Before we indict or disbar old Abe, let me point out that he surely would have spent a lot more time on a murder case than a simple debt collection, and the federal cases were also probably a lot more complex or time-consuming (e.g., fights over railroad rights of way) than the under-$500 local matters.   Given Abe’s reputation, I bet he was a bargain.

Thanks for a great post. I have just one question . . . Did Honest Abe practice value billing?

Take another look at:
>According to entries in their fee book, Stuart and Lincoln generally received $5 to $10 for >legal fees, but in People v. Truett, an 1838 murder case, they received $500. Stuart and >Lincoln generally divided fees equally. On average, Lincoln and Herndon charged a typical >client $5 to $20. However, there were several occasions when Lincoln either charged his >clients nothing or charged them a substantial amount. . . . Lincoln’s federal practice >probably supplied him with much of his income. A case could not be heard in the U. S. Circuit >Court unless it involved a dispute exceeding $500. As a result, Lincoln charged his federal >clients higher fees. He probably charged clients less while practicing in the state circuit >courts because disputes involved lesser amounts.

Admittedly, it’s hard to tell. But it does make me wonder!

Thanks for the interesting info, Marie. I just looked at Model Rule 1.5 to check on taking property, and here’s what a relevant Comment has to say:

Comment to Model Rule 1.5
Terms of Payment [ http://www.abanet.org/cpr/mrpc/rule_1_5_comm.html ]

[4] A lawyer may require advance payment of a fee, but is obliged to return any unearned portion. See Rule 1.16(d). A lawyer may accept property in payment for services, such as an ownership interest in an enterprise, providing this does not involve acquisition of a proprietary interest in the cause of action or subject matter of the litigation contrary to Rule 1.8 (i). However, a fee paid in property instead of money may be subject to the requirements of Rule 1.8(a) because such fees often have the essential qualities of a business transaction with the client.

[ you can find Rule 1.8 at http://www.abanet.org/cpr/mrpc/rule_1_8.html ]

Wow! Excellent research and writing on Attorney Lincoln. A few other trivial tidbits your readers might identify with:

* Mr. Lincoln sometimes traded his services for whatever tangible good his client might offer. Due to the current ethics rules, that practice is probably discouraged now. But, I know of at least one lawyer who was offered cars and wedding rings in lieu of dollars.

* On at least one occasion, he had to sue a client for non-payment of fees. He obtained a judgment, but, of course, never collected on it.

Great overview of Lincoln as lawyer. Because Lincoln practiced in my neck of the woods, I’ve always enjoyed reading about his days as a lawyer. For anyone interested in reading more about Lincoln, the recent biography “Lincoln” by David Herbert Donald is a great place to start.

Kevin,
Ditto about Abe.
As far as the rest of you Comments:  You are way too kind.  Blush.

p.s. Mama: Are you using Kevin’s identity again?

What a great answer David! You have a flat out incredible gift in being able to write as well as you do. As you know, writing is more than sitting down at the key board. There is focused investigation, assembling the information gathered and then weaving it together in a way that engages your audience. You are truly wonderful at it.

Bottom line for us lawyer folks is that we should have no reservation using Abe as a role model.