Columbus Bar Ass'n v. Klos

Based on the facts presented to the panel and the board, we find that Klos’s written contract to represent Clay was ambiguous and failed to conform with guidelines we have previously promulgated. The respondents ask us to recognize that attorneys who practice employment discrimination law customarily use retainer contracts to cover the investigatory phases of their cases and contingent fee contracts to cover the litigation phases.

Even assuming the appropriateness of such bifurcated contracts, the fee agreement used by Klos in the Clay matter was deficient. The portion of the contract covering…