Contingent fee practice has been an essential
ingredient in our justice system for more than 100 years. It permits
every American, regardless of wealth or social standing, the opportunity
to pursue a valid claim against even the most powerful corporation
or individual. In large measure, it has made our justice system
the envy of the world. It breathes life into the democratic ideals
that no one is above the law and everyone must be accountable
for his or her behavior.
Ironically, those who object most strenuously
to contingent fee practice, and now call for regulation or limits,
seldom have had occasion to represent the injured who need such
a fee agreement. Instead, the contingent fee critics typically
are the defendants called on to account for their negligence or
recklessness by injured consumers.
It's no secret that businesses and individuals
who want to avoid accountability for their negligent and reckless
acts are pushing for special protections in state legislatures
and Congress. But wrongdoers and their apologists have initiated
a less obvious line of attack on the American consumer, an attack
that levels its sights not on consumers but an easier target:
the lawyers who represent them.
This insidious assault is only on America's
consumer lawyers. The only party whose attorney's fees would be
limited is the consumer, not the wrongdoer! Whether the wrongdoer
seeks to limit liability or to interfere with fee agreements,
its goal remains the same: to deny access to justice to the tens
of thousands of Americans who are injured each year due to another's
wrongful acts.
Here we separate fact from fiction on contingent
fee practice and lays to rest the misperceptions created by the
opponents of this great equalizer in our justice system.
