Don Wright said:
undefinedWhat is the name of your state? Arizona
Is there attorneys who will take a divorce case on percentage of the settlement? contingency fee i think it is called. or is this legal? never heard of this before on divorces but a friend suggested it to me.
My response:
Though commonplace in personal injury and certain other general civil litigation, contingency fee agreements have traditionally been deemed improper and invalid in domestic relations proceedings. Still further, contingency fee contracts in marital cases are likely to be viewed as "promotive of dissolution" and hence violative of public policy as discouraging or impeding a potential reconciliation; i.e., giving counsel a stake in what the client might recover by way of a property division pursuant to marriage dissolution might induce counsel to dissuade the client from pursuing reconciliation. [See generally, Krieger v. Bulpitt (1953) 40 Cal.2d 97, 100, 251 P.2d 673, 674]
On the other hand, a contingency fee may be permissible where counsel is asked to undertake the defense of an already-initiated dissolution action and protect the client's interests in an already-proposed community property division; or where it otherwise appears there is no possibility for reconciliation. [See Krieger v. Bulpitt (1953) 40 Cal.2d 97, 100-101, 251 P.2d 673, 674-675--no public policy furthered in continuation of "moribund marriage"; Coviello v. State Bar (1955) 45 Cal.2d 57, 60-61, 286 P.2d 357, 358--contingent fee contract valid in proceeding to adjudge bigamous (void) marriage a nullity]
A contingency fee contract is more likely to be upheld where the client has no funds with which to pay the attorney. [Krieger v. Bulpitt (1953) 40 Cal.2d 97, 101, 251 P.2d 673, 675] But that result still assumes the agreement will not be "promotive of dissolution" (above).
IAAL
