Home → Attorney Services → Ethics Opinions → Opinion
Opinion #228. Updating Opinion No. 89 Limited Scope Representation
Issued by the Professional Ethics Commission
Date Issued: January 5, 2026
Updating Opinion No. 89 Limited Scope Representation
The purpose of this Enduring Ethics Opinion is to update Opinion No. 89, which was issued by this Commission in August 1988. In that opinion we addressed whether an attorney could limit representation of a client solely to drafting a complaint the client would then file in court.
The facts giving rise to the 1988 Opinion are that a person sought representation from an attorney who declined the engagement. The attorney, however, agreed to draft a complaint the client could sign and file with the court. When the Superior Court Justice questioned the propriety of this conduct, the attorney presented the question to the Grievance Commission, which in turn forwarded the issue to this Commission for an opinion.
The Commission concluded that "the attorney did not act unethically in agreeing with the client to limit the extent of his representation to the preparation of the complaint...."
There was no provision in the Maine Bar Rules specifically addressing limited scope representation in 1988.1 As a result, this Commission based its Opinion on the then-available Maine Bar Rules in drafting Opinion 89. There is no suggestion, this Committee observed, that the complaint, as drafted by the attorney, was frivolous; nor does it appear from the facts presented that the complaint was prepared 'merely to serve to harass or maliciously injure another.'2
Maines subsequent adoption of rules specifically permitting and regulating limited scope representation like that addressed by Opinion 89 offers practitioners more detailed guidance under such circumstances. This opinion outlines ethical obligations under current limited scope representation agreements.
1 In 1988, Maine had not yet adopted the ABA model rules, which authorized limited scope representation.
2 Internal citation to Maine Bar Rule omitted.
Applicable Rules
- D. Me. Local Rule 83.2(b)
- D. Me. Local Rule 83.2(c)
- M. R. Prof. Conduct 1.1
- M. R. Prof. Conduct 1.2(c)
- M. R. Prof. Conduct 1.2(d)
- M. R. Civ. P. 11(a)
- M. R. Civ. P. 11(b)
The Importance of Limited Scope Representation
Limited scope representation has the potential to benefit clients, attorneys and the courts by providing clients and attorneys with a modern, flexible and tailored means to define the scope and contours of the representation.
Limited scope representation:
--benefits clients by enabling them to engage attorneys for specific matters rather than for a broader, and potentially more expensive, engagement. Lowering the cost of legal services and simplifying the process of engaging an attorney are important ways to improve access to justice.
--can enable lawyers to better manage their practices and serve more clients-including clients for whom cost may be a barrier to seeking legal services--by enabling the attorneys to limit the scope of services being provided instead of entering into open-ended and potentially more complex representation.
--limited scope representation benefits the courts by reducing the number of unrepresented litigants, which allows the court to operate more efficiently.3
Rule 1.2(c)
Rule 1.2(c) provides that "A lawyer may limit the scope of representation" so long as (1) the limitation is "reasonable under the circumstances;" and (2) "the client provides informed consent after consultation." (3) In addition, a lawyer who signs certain pleadings that are filed with the court must seek approval from the court to thereafter limit the scope of representation.4
(1) Reasonable Limitation Under the Circumstances
Rule 1.2(c) provides that any agreement to limit the scope of representation must be reasonable under the circumstances. "Reasonable" is defined in Rule 1.0(h) as meaning "the conduct of a reasonably prudent and competent lawyer." Comment 6 following rule 1.2(c) acknowledges that a "reasonable" limited scope of representation could involve a brief engagement: "If, for example, a client's objective is limited to securing general information about the law and the clients needs in order to handle a common and typically uncomplicated legal problem, the lawyer and the client may agree that the lawyers services will be limited to a brief telephone consultation or office visit."
The Comment goes on to provide, however, that if the client presents with a complex legal question and is only willing to engage the lawyer for a brief period of time, "such a limitation...will not be reasonable if the time allotted was not sufficient to yield advice upon which the client can rely."
3As Chief Justice Stanfill said in her State of the Judiciary report: "the lack of attorneys adds to delay and backlog." Valerie Stanfill, Chief Justice, State of the Judiciary: A Report to the Joint Convention of the First Regular Session of the 132nd Maine Legislature (Feb. 25, 2025), https://www.courts.maine.gov/courts/sjc/soj/soj-2025.pdf. (last accessed July 29, 2025).
4M.R. Prof. C. 1.2(c) provides: A lawyer who signs a complaint, counterclaim, cross-claim or any amendment thereto that is filed with the court, may not thereafter limit representation as provided in this rule, without leave of court. An attorney may enter a limited representation agreement on behalf of an otherwise unrepresented client in a non-criminal case in Maine United States District Court at the Court's discretion provided the agreement complies with the requirements of M. R. Prof. Conduct 1.2. D. Me. Local R. 83.2(b)(2). An attorney may not withdraw a limited appearance in U.S. District of Maine without completing the scope of the limited appearance without leave of the Court. D. ME. Local R. 83.2(c).
(2) Informed Consent After Consultation
Limited scope representation may neither be unilaterally undertaken by the lawyer nor presumed by the client. Instead, it is a shared responsibility that must be agreed upon by the lawyer and the client, who together "have authority and responsibility"5 to define the scope of representation.
Rule 1.2(c) requires as a condition precedent to a limited scope representation agreement that the client provides informed consent "after consultation." This means the lawyer and client must discuss the scope of the representation, the risks and benefits of a limited scope representation, and the option of the client to seek other counsel, or to proceed self-represented in the matter.
5M.R.Prof.Conduct 1.2(c) comment 6.
(3) Effect of Lawyer Signing Pleadings
A lawyer in a limited representation agreement who signs a "complaint, counterclaim, cross-claim or any amendment thereto that is filed with the court" is precluded from limiting their representation as otherwise contemplated in Rule 1.2(c) "without leave of court." The Rule aligns with M. R. Civ. P. 11(b), which authorizes lawyers to enter limited appearances "to the extent permitted by the Maine Bar Rules," and requires that the "appearance shall state precisely the scope of the limited representation." Under M. R. Civ. P. 11(b), all appearances, including those pursuant to limited representations agreements, must comply with otherwise applicable standards for filing under M. R. Civ. P. 11(a).
A Written Agreement Delineating the Scope of Limited Representation is a "Better Practice."
Comment 6A accompanying Rule 1.2(c) provides that a signed agreement between the attorney and client that documents the limited scope agreement, while not required, is a "better practice."6 A written limited scope representation agreement is the best way to assure that there are no misunderstandings between the attorney and the client regarding the scope and duration of the representation. Moreover, a written agreement between the lawyer and client is an effective way to document that the informed consent consultation required by the rule has taken place. Given the growing complexity in the law and increasing specialization in the legal profession, an agreement documenting the boundaries of the lawyers services has become increasingly important for both the lawyer and client.
An example of a general form of a limited scope of representation agreement "which shall be sufficient to satisfy the rule" follows the rule. There is, however, no requirement that this particular form be used, and the Comment recognizes that other forms of agreement, "consistent with this rule," are permissible.
Practically, a limited scope lawyer may help their limited scope client by preparing pleadings or providing advice on how to conduct themselves in their legal matter or court matter. That scope must be clearly defined for the limited scope client. Limited scope clients may therefore obtain pleadings and other forms to file in court or to send to other parties in a non-court matter, thus advancing the purpose of the limited scope rules and extending access to legal services.
To the extent the representation involves a court proceeding, it is advisable to file an entry of limited appearance that informs the Court and the other parties of the limited scope representation agreement, so they understand the contours and scope of the limited representation.
6In cases where the limited representation involves an unrepresented party, Comment 6B states that "a written memorandum of the scope of representation is recommended."
Maine Rules of Professional Conduct Continue to Apply in Limited Scope Representation
Limited scope representation does not mean limited applicability of other rules of professional conduct. In the context of the limited scope representation all the other rules of professional conduct apply. This includes, among other things, Rules 1.1 (competence), 1.3 (diligence), 1.4 (communication), 1.5 (fees), 1.6 (confidentiality), 1.7, 1.8, 1.10 and 1.11 (conflicts of interest). Comment 8 to Rule 1.2 emphasizes this point: "All agreements concerning a lawyers representation of a client must accord with the Rules of Professional Conduct and other law."
There is one exception to conflicts of interest rules that applies in limited scope representation. Rule 1.2(d) states that attorneys providing legal services "under the auspices of a non-profit organization or a court-annexed program," who provide limited representation with no expectation by the client or the attorney of a continuing representation, are subject to Rules 1.7, 1.9, 1.10 and 1.11, regarding conflicts of interest "only if the lawyer is aware that the representation of the client involves a conflict-of-interest."7
Finally, while Comment 6 provides that a lawyer in a limited scope representation is not exempt from the duty to provide competent representation, it acknowledges that the inherently limited circumstances of the representation "[are] a factor to be considered when determining the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness, and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation." In limited scope representation, for example, an attorney may not be able to conduct their own investigation of the facts. Comment 6 recognizes this: "A lawyers advice may be based upon the scope of the representation agreed upon by the lawyer and client, and the clients representation of the facts." Comment 6(c) notes that the rule "makes clear the preparation for the legal matter is limited along with the scope of the representation."
7 M.R.Prof.C. Comment 7B provides that the use of the term aware allows a lawyer, in the limited circumstances described in Rule 1.2(d), which do not afford the attorney an opportunity to conduct a systematic conflict check, to represent clients without risk of a violation of Rules 1.7, 1.9, 1.10 and 1.11, if the lawyer knows, based on reasonable recollection and information provided by the client in the ordinary course of the consultation, that the representation does not present a conflict-of-interest. In such a case, knowledge may not be inferred from circumstances.
Moreover, under the limited circumstances of Rule 1.2(d), conflicts of interest that would otherwise be imputed to a lawyer because of the lawyer's association with a firm will not preclude the lawyer from representing a client in a limited services program. Nor will the lawyers participation in such a program preclude the lawyers firm from undertaking or continuing the representation of clients with interests adverse to a client being represented under the program's auspices.
