What Critics Ignore About Contingency Fees

Contingency fees are no windfall.

Plaintiff’s lawyers take on cases with no guarantee of compensation. We put our time on the line with no guarantee of payment. We invest our money in expenses with no guarantee of payment. We provide access to legal services with no upfront cost, which the vast majority of people would not be able to obtain otherwise.

Critics of contingency fees ignore that contingency fees are not based on the time invested in the case.

They are based on results. And our compensation is directly tied to the result we get for the client.

In fact, the ABA Model Rules list time as just one factor in determining whether any fee is reasonable. Other factors include skill, difficulty of the question involved, experience of the lawyer, reputation and ability of the lawyer, and of course, the amount involved and the results obtained.

And, even considering all these factors, the fee customarily charged is a factor, and so is whether the fee is fixed or contingent.

Imagine the best criminal defense lawyer in your city charging a $100k flat fee and being able to simply enter an appearance and call the prosecutor and get the charges dismissed based on their skill and reputation. Does that lawyer deserve less than one who spins their wheels for years and gets the client a bad result?

Justice is measured in results, not hours. Criticis of contingency fees ignore that because they only monetize their time. But that doesn’t mean that is the only way, or even the right way, to determine fees.

What do you think? Join the conversation with me on LinkedIn.