Contingency fees enable clients to access legal services without upfront payments, potentially allowing wider access but leading to inefficiencies. These fees can discourage settlements, particularly when one party pays out-of-pocket while another relies on contingency, allowing some clients to prolong litigation. Furthermore, lawyers incentivized by contingency structures might push for earlier settlements to get paid promptly, sometimes at the expense of their clients' best interests. This duality highlights a complex balance between accessibility to justice and the potential for extended litigation in the legal system.
Contingency fees allow greater access to the legal system, enabling clients to pursue legal action without upfront costs, potentially leading to inefficient outcomes.
Lawyers on contingency are less pressured to settle cases quickly, which can prolong litigation and create disparities in settlement timing between parties.
Contingency fees often lead to situations where attorneys may prioritize early settlements to secure payment, rather than considering the client's best long-term interests.
The incentive structure of contingency fees can result in longer litigations and settlements that might not occur if lawyers were charging hourly fees.
Collection
[
|
...
]