Under what circumstance is a lawyer NOT required to be paid after being fired for incompetence?

A lawyer is typically entitled to payment for services rendered, regardless of the circumstances under which they are terminated by the client. However, if a lawyer is found to be incompetent, their entitlement to payment may be affected. Incompetence can lead to a situation where the attorney has failed to provide the legal services that the client has paid for or reasonably expected.

If the lawyer's incompetence is the reason for their termination, it places the lawyer in a position where they might not be entitled to compensation for the work done, especially if that work was inadequate or resulted in harm to the client. The ethics rules recognize that a client should not have to pay for ineffective representation that could have negative repercussions.

In contrast, the other scenarios presented do not negate the lawyer’s right to payment. If a client admits to fraud, the lawyer may still be entitled to payment unless the work related to the fraudulent act. Discontinuing communication does not inherently mean the lawyer did not fulfill their duties. Lastly, a client's refusal to pay does not eliminate a lawyer's right to compensation unless there are grounds for such a refusal, such as incompetence or failure to perform.