CAN THERE BE DIFFERENT TYPES OF CONTINGENCY RETAINER AGREEMENTS?
In my view, the form of retainer used in “Raphael Partners” is inappropriate for cases where recovery is going to be less than $1,000,000.00 (predicated on the defendant’s policy limits). I know of many plaintiffs’ counsel who charge 33% of the entire recovery. In this case, 33% would have resulted in a fee of $891,000.00, which would probably be excessive. If the fee had been 25% of the recovery, plus costs, the fee would have been $825,000.00, and again probably excessive.The approach I would have used, is 25% of the first $1,000,000.00, plus 10% on any amount over and above, plus costs, which would amount to a fee of $600,000.00 in the “Raphael Partners” case, which, in my view, is totally reasonable.I therefore conclude that all retainer agreements must not be identical. HOURLY RATEMuch of what goes into retainer agreements, occur by reason of experience. We all face the prospect of an unhappy client during the course of the litigation – unhappy enough that the client instructs us
