How Referral and Co-Counsel Relationships Work

Katzman Lampert & Stoll works with attorneys throughout the United States in aviation accident matters as co-counsel or referral counsel, depending on the needs of the case, the preferences of originating counsel, and the applicable jurisdictional and ethical framework. The firm’s practice is devoted exclusively to aviation accident litigation, and these relationships are structured to add aviation-specific depth while respecting the role of the attorney who first received the client’s trust.

For many attorneys, the immediate question is not whether an aviation case is serious, but how the working relationship should be organized. Some matters call for active co-counsel involvement, with originating counsel remaining closely engaged. Others are better handled through a more traditional referral arrangement. In either setting, the objective is the same: to evaluate the case early, address the aviation-specific issues that may shape the litigation, and structure the attorney relationship clearly from the outset.

How These Relationships Usually Work

Co-counsel: originating counsel remains actively involved while Katzman Lampert & Stoll helps handle aviation-specific investigation, strategy, technical issue development, and specialized litigation issues.

Referral counsel: the matter is referred more fully, with Katzman Lampert & Stoll taking a more central aviation-litigation role while the relationship is structured in a clear and professionally managed way.

First step: in many matters, the process begins with a confidential discussion of case posture, immediate concerns, what may need attention first, and whether a co-counsel or referral structure is the better fit.

What the First Conversation Usually Covers

Attorneys do not need to have a complete liability theory before making contact. In many matters, the first conversation is a confidential discussion of the known facts, the type of aircraft or operation involved, the current investigative posture, the parties who may be implicated, and whether the case presents aviation-specific issues requiring immediate attention.

That initial discussion may include questions concerning preservation of wreckage and documents, the status of any NTSB investigation, the likely relationship between the investigation and civil claims, whether the matter appears to involve operator, maintenance, manufacturer, or airport-related exposure, and whether threshold issues such as federal preemption or other specialized defenses may shape the case early.

What Gets Decided Early

In aviation matters, early decisions often affect the course of the case. Counsel may need to determine what evidence requires immediate preservation, who may need to be identified as potentially responsible, how the investigation may interact with civil litigation, and whether the matter calls for a co-counsel structure, a referral structure, or a more limited early evaluation.

Those decisions may be influenced by the nature of the aircraft and operation, the seriousness of the event, the likely sources of liability, the complexity of the factual record, and the presence of specialized issues involving maintenance, certification, product liability, or airport-surface operations. Questions regarding who may be liable in an aviation accident are often more complex than they first appear.

How Involved Originating Counsel Can Remain

That depends on the needs of the case and the preferences of counsel. In some matters, originating counsel remains closely involved in client communication, strategic decision-making, and overall litigation oversight while Katzman Lampert & Stoll handles aviation-specific investigation, technical development, expert coordination, and specialized legal issues.

In other matters, the originating attorney may prefer a more traditional referral arrangement in which Katzman Lampert & Stoll assumes a more central role in the aviation litigation. The key point is that the relationship is not treated as one-size-fits-all. It is structured deliberately, with clarity about roles, communication, and responsibilities.

Why Relationship Structure Matters Early

A clear attorney structure matters in aviation cases because important work often begins immediately. Evidence may need to be preserved before it is altered, moved, lost, or dispersed across multiple custodians. The case may involve operators, owners, maintenance entities, manufacturers, component suppliers, training entities, airport-related actors, or others whose roles are not yet fully understood. In serious matters, delay can create confusion both in the legal work and in the investigative process.

For that reason, many attorneys involve aviation counsel before liability theories are fully developed. Early clarity about roles allows the legal team to move efficiently on preservation, investigation, and case framing. For more on those early issues, see Evidence Preservation in Aviation Cases and Evidence Preservation After an Aviation Crash.

How the Working Relationship Is Managed

A well-structured co-counsel or referral relationship depends on clear communication. That includes agreement on who is handling immediate next steps, who is communicating with the client, how major strategic decisions will be coordinated, and how responsibilities may evolve as the case develops.

The practical goal is to make sure the relationship supports the case from the outset, with clear roles, consistent communication, and early attention to the issues most likely to shape the litigation. For a fuller discussion of the substantive role aviation counsel may play, see Aviation Co-Counsel.

Ethical and Jurisdictional Considerations

Referral and co-counsel arrangements are structured in accordance with applicable ethical rules and jurisdictional requirements. That includes attention to fee-sharing rules where applicable, attorney responsibilities, client consent where required, and the practical demands of litigating an aviation case that may involve multiple jurisdictions, federal procedural issues, or parties located in different states.

These issues are addressed as part of the structure of the relationship, not as an afterthought. In aviation litigation, jurisdictional posture and procedural setting can materially affect the course of the case, and the attorney relationship should be organized accordingly from the beginning.

When It Makes Sense to Discuss Structure Early

It often makes sense to discuss referral or co-counsel structure early where the matter involves a commercial airline, turbine aircraft, helicopter, charter or corporate operation, possible maintenance or product-liability issues, multiple potentially responsible parties, an active investigation, or uncertainty concerning the legal framework that may govern the claims.

Attorneys who are still evaluating whether a case requires specialized aviation counsel do not need to wait until every factual issue has been resolved. In many matters, the most useful first step is a confidential discussion about the case posture, the likely next steps, and the structure that best fits the matter.

Selected Related Resources

• Aviation Co-Counsel
• Evidence Preservation in Aviation Cases
• NTSB Investigations and Civil Litigation
• NTSB Investigation Process
• Complex Aviation Litigation Methodology
• Who Is Liable in an Aviation Accident?

Attorneys seeking to discuss a potential referral or co-counsel arrangement may contact the firm directly for a confidential evaluation.