Chambers

The issues now before us arise from a dispute between two attorneys over fees generated from the successful prosecution of a case previously before us. (See Weeks v. Baker & McKenzie (1998) 63 Cal. App.4th 1128 , 74 Cal.Rptr.2d 510 .) The trial court entered judgment against appellant in his action for breach of an agreement with respondent for division of attorney fees. The trial court found that the agreement violated rule 2-200 of the Rules of Professional Conduct, and appellant's action for quantum meruit barred by the lapse of the two-year statute of limitations. We conclude that appellant cannot recover a portion of the contingent fee under the agreement, but is entitled to proceed with his claim for quantum meruit.

Appellant and respondent were attorneys with separate law practices in San Francisco. They had individual office letterheads, and respondent listed his professional address as his home law office on 43rd Avenue. Respondent also maintained a separate professional liability insurance policy for his practice. Appellant and respondent did not list each other as employees or partners in any official documents they filed.

However, in accordance with an…