Started By
Message

re: Prosecutorial Misconduct Reform

Posted on 1/19/24 at 12:20 pm to
Posted by NC_Tigah
Carolinas
Member since Sep 2003
124712 posts
Posted on 1/19/24 at 12:20 pm to
quote:

That's not how it works now
But it is.
Sorry, who is paying the plaintiff attorney?

Because if you claim it is the plaintiff, it obviously calls to question the financial basis for contingency. All money originates from the defendant. Again, sans contingency-based practice, we could have a legit discussion here.

The risk in our tort system is uniquely and heavily skewed to the defendant
Posted by SlowFlowPro
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
425838 posts
Posted on 1/19/24 at 12:27 pm to
quote:

Because if you claim it is the plaintiff, it obviously calls to question the financial basis for contingency. All money originates from the defendant.



Contingencies are legal and legitimate.


quote:

Again, sans contingency-based practice, we could have a legit discussion here.


This issue has already come up. That's why courts could adopt the lodestar method instead, to replace contingencies from the equation.

Posted by NaturalBeam
Member since Sep 2007
14544 posts
Posted on 1/19/24 at 12:35 pm to
quote:

But it is.
No, it isn't. The defendant pays only what he is obligated to pay to the plaintiff for their damages and their damages only. There is no separate line item on the verdict form for attorney's fees. In fact, they are expressly not allowed by statute in most cases, including medical malpractice.

As it it, the winning plaintiff pays her attorney out of her own pocket. The same way the winning defendant pays his attorney out of his own pocket (or out of his insurance company's pocket).
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram