What must a lawyer show to reject a court appointment based on financial burden?

To successfully reject a court appointment due to financial burden, a lawyer must demonstrate that accepting the appointment would create an unreasonable financial burden. This requirement recognizes that while attorneys are expected to serve in a capacity that meets their professional obligations, there are limits to what one can reasonably undertake without jeopardizing their financial stability or ability to sustain their practice.

Establishing an unreasonable financial burden involves providing evidence that the costs associated with the case would be overly detrimental to the lawyer’s financial situation. This could be tied to factors like potential loss of income, existing debt, or other obligations that could be significantly impacted by taking on additional pro bono work or low-paying assignments.

The other options rely on different criteria, such as a modest financial burden or lack of qualifications, which are not sufficient grounds for rejecting a court appointment. A prior commitment is also not a direct indicator of financial inability; it may speak to scheduling conflicts but does not address the financial aspect necessary for this specific assertion. Thus, the requirement to demonstrate an unreasonable financial burden is critical in the context of this scenario.