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.

Name:

Email:

Phone:

Question:

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

  • Legal Malpractice in Criminal Cases: A Claim Rarely Proved February 4, 2012
    In his Criminal Law and Procedure column, Justice Barry Kamins, Administrative Judge of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, discusses the elements of a malpractice action, including a specific pleading requirement that essentially bars actions against defense counsel in the overwhelming majority of criminal matters, so much so, that it is ... (more) […]
  • Judicial Immunity and Malpractice Cases February 3, 2012
    Psychologists and Forensic experts are routinely appointed by the Court to examine and produce evidence for the Court; attorneys similarly are used as guardians ad litem, as Court examiners and the like. […]
  • Continuous Representation in Legal Malpractice February 2, 2012
    The statute of limitations is three years in legal malpractice. It may be extended by the principal of continuous representation. […]
  • The Successor Attorney Problem in Legal Malpractice February 1, 2012
    Assume the following: Plaintiff has a medical malpractice case and retains Defendant law firm to handle it. […]
  • New Jersey Legal Malpractice Lawyers Now Offer Helpful Information on the Web February 1, 2012
    Teaneck's Davis, Saperstein & Salomon, P.C., recently added information to its law firm website to assist individuals, corporations and government entities that have suffered losses due to the mishandling of their case or transaction by hired counsel.Teaneck, NJ January 31, 2012 To meet the growing demand for information about one's legal optio […]