Dear Stacey:
Just an early morning thought on this subject...even the percentage of
a contingency fee seems to me to be up for grabs in a successful collab
p.i. case. Being compensated for our work, as professionals (from
EVERY profession) is a big part of the collab agreement. It seems to
me that there may be more satisfaction for plaintiffs because often the
% of the contingency fee ends up causing the end result to feel
uncomfortable for the plaintiffs (especially when costs come off the
top). This way dollars could be discussed, tracing to the practical
outcome for all parties and professionals involved.
This is coming from a 16-year lawyer who has never done a p.i. case.
Please forgive if I'm making any big gaffes here.
I did, however, successfully facilitate a divorce this week where the
25 year old husband was permanently disabled when his in-laws' balcony
collapsed. (and the lawyers tried to tell me this had NOTHING to do
with the divorce--ha--hubby stated that mother-in-law knew the railing
was going bad). So, hubby is suing his soon-to-be-former-in-laws for
policy limits. How might this whole case, this whole family (2 little
boys involved) be different if the divorce was not subject to the echo
of the p.i. litigation? And what a tough spot for wife to be in--stuck
between the father of her children and her parents!
It is so beautiful to see the "curve of the earth" as collaboration
keeps stretching!
Have an awesome weekend, everybody!
Kimberly A. Schavey, P.C.
3900 Juan Tabo Blvd., NE
Albuquerque, NM 87111-3984
505-839-1965
505-298-3939 fax
Kimberly@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.NMFamilyLaw.com
Board Certified Family Law Specialist
Member of New Mexico Collaborative Law Group
On Aug 25, 2004, at 9:03 AM, staceylangenbahn wrote:
I am a personal injury defense lawyer. I believe CL could be used to
resolve many types of injury cases. The insurance company people I
have talked to are very interested in CL as a way to save costs. How
do I sell the idea to the Plaintiff's bar? These cases usually are
taken by a Plaintiff's lawyer on contingency. My understanding is
that the Plaintiff's bar in Texas objected in the past to Cl's
application to contingency cases. If a collaborative lawyer takes a
Plaintiff's case on contingency, and then it does not settle and the
Plaintiff gets a litigation lawyer, how does the Plaintiff's CL
lawyer get paid? The options as I see them are for the CL lawyer to
agree with the Plaintiff and the litigation lawyer that the CL lawyer
would receive quantum meruit for the work the CL lawyer has done (but
if all that work is considered confidential and inadmissible, how
does the CL lawyer show what work s/he has done and how the CL lawyer
contributed?) The CL lawyer could take a referral fee. I was
initially concerned that a CL lawyer's taking a referral fee would
give the appearance that the CL lawyer maintains an interest in the
litigation and that the CL lawyer may have incentive not to give full
effort to settlement in the CL process. However, upon second
thought, I realized this would rarely be the case. The CL lawyer has
greater incentive to settle, because then the CL lawyer would take
the entire contingency fee, rather than an uncertain referral fee
which amount depends on what the litigation lawyer settles for a jury
awards. What are your thoughts?
Regards,
Stacey H. Langenbahn
Attorney and Mediator
Locker & Lee, P.C.
6600 E. Campus Circle Dr., Suite 310
Irving, TX 75063
(214) 698-3003
(972) 465-7997 fax
stacey.langenbahn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<lrec_companion_043004.gif>
<l.gif>
Yahoo! Groups Links
• To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CollabLaw/
• To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
CollabLaw-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
• Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
