Home › Indiana › Rules of Professional Conduct › Rule 6.2

Rule 6.2 2. Accepting Appointments

← Previous Rule 6.1: 1. Pro Bono Publico Service Next → Rule 6.3: 3. Membership in Legal Service Organization

Rule Text

A lawyer shall not seek to avoid appointment by a tribunal to represent a person except for good cause, such as when:

(a) representing the client is likely to result in violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law;

(b) representing the client is likely to result in an unreasonable financial burden on the lawyer; or

(c) the client or the cause is so repugnant to the lawyer as to be likely to impair the client-lawyer relationship or the lawyer's ability to represent the client.

Amendment history: Effective January 1, 2005

Plain-English Summary (for reference only — not a substitute for the rule text above)

This summary is not the rule. The rule text controls.

When a court asks a lawyer to take on a case, the lawyer generally can't turn it down just because they don't want it. Lawyers are expected to accept these assignments, even if the case isn't something they would normally choose to handle.

There are a few good reasons a lawyer can say no. First, if taking the case would force the lawyer to break ethics rules or other laws, they can decline. Second, if representing the client would create a financial hardship that's too much to bear, that's also a valid reason. Third, if the lawyer finds the client or the case so distasteful that it would get in the way of doing a good job or maintaining a proper working relationship, they can ask to be excused.

This rule exists so that people who need legal help can get it, even in unpopular or difficult cases. Courts rely on lawyers to step up and represent people who might otherwise struggle to find help. The exceptions are meant to be limited, not an easy way out just because a case is inconvenient or unappealing.

Committee Notes

Comment

[1] A lawyer ordinarily is not obliged to accept a client whose character or cause the lawyer regards as repugnant. The lawyer's freedom to select clients is, however, qualified. All lawyers have a responsibility to assist in providing pro bono publico service. See Rule 6.1. An individual lawyer may fulfill this responsibility by accepting a fair share of unpopular matters or indigent or unpopular clients. A lawyer may also be subject to appointment by a court to serve unpopular clients or persons unable to afford legal services.

Appointed Counsel

[2] For good cause a lawyer may seek to decline an appointment to represent a person who cannot afford to retain counsel or whose cause is unpopular. Good cause exists if the lawyer could not handle the matter competently, see Rule 1.1, or if undertaking the representation would result in an improper conflict of interest, for example, when the client or the cause is so repugnant to the lawyer as to be likely to impair the client-lawyer relationship or the lawyer's ability to represent the client. A lawyer may also seek to decline an appointment if acceptance would be unreasonably burdensome, for example, when it would impose a financial sacrifice so great as to be unjust.

[3] An appointed lawyer has the same obligations to the client as retained counsel, including the obligations of loyalty and confidentiality, and is subject to the same limitations on the client-lawyer relationship, such as the obligation to refrain from assisting the client in violation of the Rules.

← Previous Rule 6.1: 1. Pro Bono Publico Service Next → Rule 6.3: 3. Membership in Legal Service Organization

This Rule Set

View All Ind. R. Prof. Cond. Rules

Last updated: August 2026

Report an error