A contingency fee is the amount of money the client pays a lawyer after winning a court case. It is, in most cases, a percentage of money that a client recovers from a certain lawsuit. It means that the lawyer expects nothing should the person he/she represents fails to succeed in a certain case and is used to encourage the best submission and defence(Kritzer, 1998) . In most cases, the contingency fee is used when settling claims for personal injury and the claimant expects to receive a certain amount of money as compensation. The lawyer and the client agree to share the amount according to a certain percentage or ratio. Contingency agreement also apply to other cases like civil rights, collections, patent litigations, and loan transactions(Helland, 2003) . This type of settlement has various benefits for the different parties involved. The first advantage of contingency agreement is the lack of upfront required to be paid to the lawyer to represent a client. As the payment is settled after the success, the client does not have to prepare any amount before representation. He/she can, therefore, seek the services of a lawyer without having any amount of money.
The second benefit of a contingency agreement is that it acts as an incentive for better representation as the payment depends on the success of the case. The lawyer will put a strong defence to ensure that his/her client wins the case and share the compensation got. Lastly, the client is saved any cost in case he/she loses the case. However, the contingency agreement has some pitfalls, especially to the lawyer. First, the lawyer stands to lose in a situation where the plaintiff loses the case as he/she depends on the success of the case to get paid. The second disadvantage of contingency agreement to the lawyer is that it can put undue pressure on him/her. He/she is forced to go beyond his/her ability to win the case and get paid.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Hourly Billing
Alternatively, the lawyer may opt for hourly billing which involves charging a client depending on the time he/she has spent on a case. However, the billing depends on various factors which include, the nature of the case, the experience of the lawyer, and hourly charges within a certain locality(Fortney, 2005) . This type of legal pricing is common in many standard cases where law firms are involved. However, it is being phased out by other billing models like fixed rating and contingency agreement. Hourly legal pricing has various advantages the first one being its efficiency and easy to handle. The plaintiff is aware of the amount he/she is supposed to pay for a particular time while the lawyer knows the amount to expect(Shepherd & Cloud, 1999) . The second benefit of hourly billing is that the attorney is assured of payment whether he/she wins or loses the case. This is contrary to a contingency agreement which depends on the success of the case.
To guarantee the security of payment, retainer fees are used together with hourly billing by reducing it from the former. This type of arrangement is allowed provided that whatever remains of the retainer fees is given back to the plaintiff. Various factors like the type of the client and nature of the case determine the amount set in this agreement(Baker, 2002) . Ethically, the attorney is prohibited from charging illegal or unreasonable fees to the client depending on the nature of the case. He/she is also supposed to maintain the terms of the agreement before and after the case. Finally, Christian ethics plays a critical role in determining the amount the attorney is supposed to charge a client. Compassion should guide him/her in making this decision and should consider the plaintiff's ability to pay.
References
Baker, L. (2002). Facts about Fees: Lessons for Legal Ethics. Texas Law Review .
Fortney, S. S. (2005). The billable hours derby: empirical data on the problems and pressure points. Fordham Urban Law Journal .
Helland, E. (2003). Contingency Fees, Settlement Delay, and Low-Quality Litigation: Empirical Evidence from Two Datasets. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization . https://doi.org/10.1093/jleo/ewg019
Kritzer, H. M. (1998). Contingent-fee lawyers and their clients: Settlement expectations, settlement realities, and issues of control in the lawyer-client relationship. Law and Social Inquiry . https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4469.1998.tb00034.x
Shepherd, G. B., & Cloud, M. (1999). Time and money: Discovery leads to hourly billing. University of Illinois Law Review .
