On Wednesday, August 6, 2025, the Presiding Disciplinary Judge of the Colorado Supreme Court approved an amended stipulation to discipline and publicly censured attorney Ginger Vidrine for violations related to her fee agreements. The censure, effective immediately, includes conditions and stems from two separate client matters in 2023 and 2024.
The case is entitled “In the Matter of Ginger Vidrine,” with case number 25PDJ49.
In the first case, Vidrine was hired in 2023 to represent a client facing multiple felony sex offense charges. The client paid a flat fee of $12,000 under an agreement that outlined three benchmarks: Vidrine would earn one-third of the fee upon entering her appearance, one-third after reviewing discovery, and one-third when plea negotiations began. From August 2023 to January 2024, Vidrine logged approximately 90 hours and met all benchmarks.
In January 2024, a new “trial fee” agreement of $125,000 was signed, with half earned at the trial setting and half when motions were set. The agreement stated no additional fees would be charged if the case proceeded to a motions hearing or trial, but no refunds would be issued if it did not. The client pleaded guilty in May 2024, and Vidrine worked 265 hours from January to July 2024, through sentencing. Her firm later refunded $40,000 to the client.
In the second matter, a client retained Vidrine in May 2024 for a criminal case involving three felony sex charges. The client paid a $30,000 flat fee with a similar benchmark structure: one-third earned upon entering appearance, one-third after reviewing discovery, and one-third upon starting plea negotiations. The agreement also required a minimum $25,000 fee if the case proceeded to trial on one charge. Vidrine worked approximately 35 hours from May 7 to May 17, 2024, reviewing discovery and prior counsel’s materials. The client terminated her services on May 17, and Vidrine’s firm refunded the full $30,000.
According to the filing, Vidrine’s actions violated Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct, specifically Rule 1.5(a), prohibiting unreasonable fees or expenses; Rule 1.5(g), barring nonrefundable fees or retainers; and Rule 1.5(h), requiring specific benchmarks for earning portions of a flat fee before a case concludes.
According to Avvo, Ms. Vidrine is a criminal defense Lawyer in Lake Charles, LA. She acquired her law license in Colorado in 2011.
A copy of the original filing can be found here.
