Contingency Fees
In the costly realm of the courts, the contingent fee system acts as an equalizer. It allows access to justice for those without great means – and deters meritless lawsuits.

A contingency fee is designed to expand access to the courts by making it easier for those without the financial means to pay for legal services. In a typical contingency fee agreement, the plaintiff is only responsible for paying their attorney if they win the case, with the payment coming as a percentage of the winnings.

The reason that contingency fees are used so often is related to the cost of pursuing a trial. Most people don’t plan for the cost of going to court to hold a wrongdoer accountable, and therefore are not likely to have the cash on hand to cover the necessary costs. Unlike large corporations that can pay hundreds or even thousands of dollars in hourly fees to their attorneys, a contingency fee allows people who cannot afford legal services to seek justice.

Without contingency fees, most people would not be able to access the legal system even if they have a compelling reason to do so. This would tip the scales of justice in favor of those with money, who could use it to bully those who do not have the resources to defend themselves. Even opponents acknowledge that hourly attorney costs are the most common barrier to access to the courts. Contingency fees eliminate such barriers.

The contingency fee system also adds an additional layer of protection against “frivolous lawsuits.” Contingency fee lawyers simply will not undertake a lawsuit that is without merit for a simple reason: An attorney is unlikely to invest hundreds or even thousands of hours in a case if their client does not have a good chance to win. This additional litmus test for every case helps to lower the number of lawsuits filed, saving time and resources for our underfunded, overextended, and currently backlogged court system

Contingency fees make sure that a lawyer’s interests are closely tied with those of a client. The plaintiff will most likely receive better representation, as the lawyer has a higher incentive to do a good job. Tactics such as delaying cases or wasting time in order to “run out the clock” are eliminated, as the lawyers themselves are spending the funds required to try the case. When everyone’s interests are aligned toward speedy case resolution – everyone saves money and time: the plaintiff, the lawyers and the courts system itself.

Eliminating or capping contingency fees only benefits wealthy and powerful corporations, who have a vested interest in severely limiting peoples’ right to pursue litigation when their rights are violated. For example, limiting California lawyers to a 20% contingency fee would force them to only accept consumer litigation that could result in a big reward. This would prevent many lawyers from taking on smaller, but worthy, cases. Further, some California statutes allow for courts to award attorney fees for prevailing plaintiffs in order to incentivize important policy cases such as civil rights, elder abuse and the enforcement of key consumer statutes. Even if monetary damages are low, the California legislature has determined that Californians’ civil, elder and consumer legal rights should be protected thus adding teeth to these laws to ensure wrongdoers can be held accountable. A cap on contingency fees would remove these protections and leave most Californians without access to justice.

Contingency fees help maintain equal footing in our courts between wealthy and powerful corporations and the average Californian who lacks the economic clout to afford high-priced corporate attorneys. Without this system for financing litigation, our nation’s bedrock, founding principles – that every individual matters and has the Seventh Amendment right to a fair trial – risk joining the rubble of civilizations lost to history.