45 C.F.R. § 1611.8

Change in financial eligibility status

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) If, after making a determination of financial eligibility and accepting a client for service, the recipient becomes aware that a client has become financially ineligible through a change in circumstances, a recipient shall discontinue representation supported with LSC funds if the change in circumstances is sufficient, and is likely to continue, to enable the client to afford private legal assistance, and discontinuation is not inconsistent with applicable rules of professional responsibility.

(b) If, after making a determination of financial eligibility and accepting a client for service, the recipient later determines that the client is financially ineligible on the basis of later discovered or disclosed information, a recipient shall discontinue representation supported with LSC funds if the discontinuation is not inconsistent with applicable rules of professional responsibility.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2001–2003 · leading case: United States v. Legal Servs., 249 F.3d 1077 (D.C. Cir. 2001).
United States v. Legal Servs., 249 F.3d 1077 (D.C. Cir. 2001). · cites it 2× “” 45 C.F.R. § 1611.8 (a). Disclosure of retainer agreements associated with client names would reveal exactly the sort of information appellant refuses to disclose: the general matter of individual clients’ representations.”
United States v. Leg Svc NY, 249 F.3d 1077 (D.C. Cir. 2001). · cites it 2× “" 45 C.F.R. 1611.8(a). Disclosure of retainer agreements associated with client names would reveal exactly the sort of information appellant refuses to disclose: the general matter of individual clients' representations.”
Bronx Legal Servs. v. Legal Servs. Corp., 64 F. App'x 310 (2d Cir. 2003). “” 45 C.F.R. § 1611.8 (a). Thus, when Congress passed § 509(h), requiring that grantees provide both “retainer agreements .”
— 45 C.F.R. § 1611.8(a) — 1 case
United States v. Leg Svc NY, 249 F.3d 1077 (D.C. Cir. 2001). “" 45 C.F.R. 1611.8(a). Disclosure of retainer agreements associated with client names would reveal exactly the sort of information appellant refuses to disclose: the general matter of individual clients' representations.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.