Are contingency fee agreements enforceable?

In personal injury cases, attorneys usually agree to represent the client in exchange for one-third (33.33%) of the gross recovery.  This is known as a contingency fee.    For the attorney’s contingency fee agreement to be enforceable, it must reasonable at the time the attorney was retained in relationship to the expected difficulty of the case.   In other words, it would be unreasonable for an attorney to charge a client in excess of one-third, unless there are extraordinary circumstances.    An excessive contingency fee  agreement is not enforceable. 

One Court explained why: “[A] fee agreement between lawyer and client is not an ordinary business contract.  The profession has both an obligation of public service and duties to clients which transcend ordinary business relationships and prohibit the lawyer from taking advantage of the client.  Thus, in fixing and collecting fees the profession must remember that it is a branch of the administration of justice and not a mere money getting trade”.   Matter of Swartz 686 P.2d 1236, 1243 (Ariz. 1984)

The reasonableness of the contingency fee must also be determined after the case is resolved.   For example, a one-third contingency fee may become unreasonable if the attorney spent  only a few dozen hours in obtaining a settlement.  In such situations, the attorney should voluntarily agree to reduce his or her fees so that the attorney does not receive an unwarranted windfall. 

In Maryland, a contingency fee agreement of 50% or more is both unethical and unenforceable, because an attorney is not allowed to have too great an interest in the client’s case.

If the attorney’s fee agreement is unenforceable due to excessiveness, the attorney is only allowed to recover the reasonable value of  the legal services rendered.   The reasonable value of the attorney’s services is usually substantially less than the contingency fee.

Comments are closed.

Articles
Article by Stewart A. Sutton featured in the Maryland Bar Journal:
Emotional Distress Damages - Recoverable in Legal Malpractice Actions
Contact Stewart Sutton

Receive Complimentary Case Consultation

To contact us simply complete this form or contact us using the information provided below.

[contact-form 404 "Not Found"]

Law Office of Stewart Andrew Sutton, LLC
8 Executive Park Court
Germantown, Maryland 20874
Telephone: 301-916-5000
Fax: 301-916-1201
E-Mail: stewart@stewartsutton.com

  • Insurer v. Defense Attorney in Legal Malpractice September 3, 2010
    It's not often that one sees an insurer v. defense attorney legal malpractice case, but this one seems to have very big damages. […]
  • Pa. Jury Awards $1.8 Million in Legal Malpractice Suit September 3, 2010
    A Philadelphia jury has awarded nearly $1.8 million in a legal malpractice case in which the plaintiff alleged her attorney failed to plead all of the relevant theories in her medical malpractice case, leading to the necessity of settling her case for $1 million, despite having received a $2.5 million verdict. […]
  • The Defense of Legal Malpractice Cases - Including Your Own September 2, 2010
    The story you have requested is available only to premium access subscribers. Premium subscribers have access to every news story, decision and special report we publish, including a complete one-year searchable archive and exclusive e-mail news alerts. […]
  • Motions to Dismiss and Legal Malpractice September 2, 2010
    The relationship between a motion to dismiss [CPLR 3211]. a request to amend the pleadings, and dismissal on the merits is wrought with both emotion yet is based upon logic. […]
  • Michigan Medical and Legal Professionals Turn to Geoffrey Brown for Malpractice Appeals September 2, 2010
    As a distinguished member of Michigan law firm Collins, Einhorn, Farrell & Ulanoff, P.C., Geoffrey Brown focuses primarily on defense of medical and legal malpractice at the appellate level. […]