A personal injury law firm whose name will remain unspoken “explains” on its website why exorbitant contingent fees are justifiable and ethical. The page says that a lawyer receiving a higher potential fee will probably do a better job representing the client than one who will receive a lesser proportion of the settlement or damages: more motivation!
This is exactly the opposite of what the ethics rules of every jurisdiction mandate. A lawyer is obligated to represent a client to the best of his or her ability regardless of the fee, including when the representation is pro bono, that is, for no fee at all. A lawyer who calibrates the effort and passion he or she puts into a case based on the size of the fee, negotiated or potential, is an unethical lawyer, an untrustworthy lawyer.
A bad lawyer.
And yet here is a law firm stating, “The more you pay us, the better job we’ll do.”
Disgusting.
But, somehow, not surprising….
Ethics Alarms 
I worked for a lawyer who did not like contingency fees.
He liked to bill the hell out of a file; he was kind of a workaholic.
The problem with a contingency file is that there is an inclination not to overwork a file when the cost-benefit is not there. (Of course, you should not be overwork an hourly file, either.)
But, his point was that contingency files create a conflict of interest between the lawyer and the client because the lawyer has an incentive to reach a settlement and reach it more quickly, whereas a lawyer bills on an hourly file out of a pure desire for justice. I think he was just trying to rationalize not doing contingency work, but he did have a point nonetheless. Contingency files CAN place a lawyer’s interest at odds with a client’s interest.
But, I still think the lawyer in the post has it backward. The implicit motivation in a contingency case is to close it out for the most amount of money with the least amount of work. Of course, different cases demand differing levels of attention, etc., and some cases just have to go to trial. But, the economics of a contingency case remain the same.
-Jut
The law firm I work for usually prefers to charge a flat fee up front, rather than bill at an hourly rate. We used to handle a lot of collections cases, which we did on a contingency fee basis, but we’ve cut back a lot on collections in recent years, and only do them now for our largest long-term clients who also send us other types of cases, as collections often require a LOT of work compared to the amount we’re ultimately able to earn in fees (25% if we don’t have to file suit; 1/3 after court costs if we do file suit). We do also accept cases from customers with one of the pre-paid legal plans, but only in counties we already appear in, and often only if they’re willing to pay the difference between what the pre-paid legal plan pays and our usual flat-rate fee.
When i was in health care providing anesthesia the amount I was paid for admisnitering an Epidural to a laboring patient was different according to the health insurance plan. E.G. a prvate policy may pay me $500.00. The medicaid payment gave me $16.90.
It never occured to me that i should provide differet levels of care.
I should unretire amd readjstment my biling and collections!