Ethical Pitfalls of Billing Two Cases Simultaneously: A Cautionary Guide for New Lawyers

By Stacy Plotkin-Wolff

Imagine you are in court for a Case Management Conference regarding Client A’s case. The court has a busy calendar, and Client A’s case is well into the docket. To stay productive, you open your laptop and start drafting a discovery motion for Client B. After waiting for an hour and a half, Client A’s case is finally called and you spend just a few minutes on the court appearance. When you return to the office, you bill Client A for one and a half hours for a “court appearance” and Client B for one hour of “motion drafting.” 

For newer California attorneys handling high caseloads, multitasking is often necessary. However, when it comes to billing—especially hourly billing—ethical pitfalls can arise quickly. This article explores the ethical and practical considerations involved in billing for two matters at once. 

The central ethical issue here is misrepresentation. When you bill Client A for time spent “appearing in court” while also billing Client B for legal research or writing, you create the misleading impression that you dedicated two and a half full hours to their respective cases—when you only worked for one and a half total hours. 

This may violate California Rules of Professional Conduct, Rules 1.5, 1.4, and 8.4(c). Rule 1.5 prohibits charging “unconscionable” or “clearly excessive” fees, Rule 1.4 requires lawyers to keep clients reasonably informed about significant developments, including those related to billing, and Rule 8.4(c) prohibits conduct involving “dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.” Without disclosure and consent, billing both clients for overlapping time risks misleading them about how much time you spent on their individual matters. This is not a mere technicality; California treats billing misrepresentations seriously because clients rely on billing statements to understand the work that was done and for whom. 

The State Bar of California’s Formal Opinion No. 1996-147 sheds light on this issue. The State Bar discussed the applicability of RPC 4-200 (now RPC 1.5) and Business and Professions Code 6148. It stated, “When a lawyer does not fully disclose that they will be billing the same time on more than one matter or for more than one client, the lawyer cannot ethically engage in such billing practices.” It concluded that a lawyer may not bill different clients for the same time unless the attorney fully discloses the overlap, obtains each client’s informed consent, and ensures that the total fee is not unconscionable. 

This means that unless both clients are aware of and agree to your multitasking, billing them for the same period is likely unethical. The opinion also warns that billing two clients for the same hour, each at your full rate, effectively inflates your earnings for that hour without accurately reflecting the true amount of time worked on each matter. Without transparency, that could be considered deceptive or dishonest, in violation of Rule 8.4(c). 

In the scenario described, at a minimum, time should be proportionately allocated—e.g., half an hour for Client A and one hour for Client B—provided the allocation reflects the actual work performed. However, full double billing (one and a half hours to Client A and one hour to Client B) for the same one-and-a-half-hour window would likely cross ethical boundaries without informed consent from both clients. To navigate the courtroom waiting time issue ethically, newer lawyers should consider the following practical safeguards: 

1. Be Accurate and Specific: If you bill for waiting time, describe it precisely. Avoid vague terms like “appearance” if most of the time was spent waiting or working on another matter. 
2. Track Time Contemporaneously: Record the actual time you spent on each matter while multitasking. Don’t rely on memory or estimates at the end of the day.
3. Disclose in Advance (Ideally in Engagement Letters): If you anticipate using waiting time to work on other matters, address that in your engagement agreements. A simple clause can allow for value-based or concurrent billing, contingent upon client consent. 
4. Don’t Double Bill Unless Both Clients Consent: If you spend one hour doing work for two clients, you may split that hour or bill one client, but you cannot charge both clients at full rate for the same hour without consent from both. 
5. Ask Yourself if Your Billing Entry Would Withstand Scrutiny: Could you justify the billing entry if asked by a client, a judge, or the State Bar? If your answer is no—or even “not sure”—reconsider your billing. 

While the courtroom waiting scenario may seem ambiguous, the ethical rules are clear. Without full disclosure and consent, billing two clients for the same time block is likely misleading, regardless of how diligently you worked on both matters. Being physically present in court for one client does not grant you the right to bill them for all time spent there, especially if you are working for another client during that same period. Ethical billing goes beyond simply logging hours; it encompasses fairness, transparency, and professional integrity. 

For newer lawyers building their practices and reputations, how you handle your billing can significantly impact your credibility and client relationships and have long-lasting consequences. Err on the side of honesty. Your clients, your license, and your conscience will thank you.