2 total
Solicitor-client accounts under a contingency fee agreement reduced to ensure reasonableness and maximize the injured plaintiff's recovery.
The plaintiffs sought approval of solicitor-client accounts proposed by two law firms that represented them in a personal injury action arising from a motor vehicle accident.
The accounts were based on a previously approved contingency fee agreement.
The court approved the first lawyer's account for the main action but denied fees for the third party claim, as he undertook no risk regarding that claim.
The court approved the second law firm's account for the main action but reduced their proposed fees for the third party claim, finding the full contingency amount would be unreasonable.
The net settlement funds payable to the injured plaintiff were increased as a result.
The court approved a 25% contingency fee agreement for a disabled plaintiff but denied counsel's request to retain recovered costs.
This application concerned the approval of a contingency fee retainer agreement (CFRA) for personal injury litigation involving a plaintiff under a disability.
The court approved an overall 25% contingency fee for the main action and third-party claim, to be split 15% for Connolly Obagi LLP and 10% for previous counsel, Christopher Moore.
However, the court dismissed Connolly Obagi LLP's request to receive costs recovered from the opposing party, finding no "exceptional circumstances" to deviate from the rule that costs go to the client.
The court also provided directions for the continuation of settlement approval motions and the finalization of solicitor-client accounts.
