Your current attorney might be entitled to at least 33 1/3% of the settlement amount - and you probably should expect to pay more overall if you have to find another attorney.
That said, you could have an attorney in your area review all facts of your settlement to date and possibly help you handle the conference call, this if you fear intimidation.
That clause in the contract you signed is problematic. You can review Rule 1.16 of the Rules of Professional Conduct at the link provided earlier.
Good luck
So I met with them (over the phone).
Highlights:
1. Meeting was with two people I never corresponded with before. One introduced himself as a partner of the firm. The second did not explicitly state her role with the firm, but left me with the impression that she was an accountant, business manager of office manager of some sort.
I was on the call by myself.
The call was recorded. I agreed to that. I mostly listened anyway.
2. They were professional, polite and cordial. That is not to say that they weren't firm when we "talked turkey", but at not point did I feel they were trying to bully or intimidate me.
3. They conceded that they should have noticed my edits, as well was my comments in the email highlighting those edits.
4. They said they would not have represented me if they were aware of the terms I required. They also offered an explanation that I found interesting and was one of the biggest take-a-ways from the call. They said that their usual terms for a civil suit are for their share of the settlement to be taken directly from the settlement amount. Then 100% of expert witness testimony costs come out of their client's share of the settlement. Wow!!
They said they usually take 1/3 of the settlement, calculated as described above. But in this case, they chose to have the expert witness costs come off the top of the settlement before the 60/40 split occur. They said they did this bc the nature of the case was such that they expected this approach would be more beneficial to their clients. They offered to share numbers with me to prove that this did, in fact, end up being true.
I declined their offer to review their numbers. I don't doubt they are telling the truth.
5. Ultimately they offered to "split the difference" with me, giving them 36 2/3% and the rest to me (of course after witness costs were taken off the top). They made it clear that if I refused this offer, they would return the case to me to pursue on my own, but reminded me that they would still be due compensation for their work if I received settlement funds. They did not say how much.
6. I thanked them for the offer and told them I would get back to them next week.
So that is basically it for the meeting....Now, some of my thoughts.
a) I don't believe they would really walk away from their share (even the 33 1/3% if I let the case fall), I believe that is a bluff. But who will wait longer? Them or me?
b) Their explanation about how they usually structure comp for their cases did hit a cord with me. I had not considered that at all. From what I have read on-line, what they describe does seem to be the norm (of which I was unaware). But upping their share to 40% shows me they were not trying to be that magnanimous, but it does carry some weight with me.
c) I wonder what my chances would be at getting the settlement funds on my own from the company we sued? At this point, I have pretty much ruled out the option of getting another lawyer involved. I either accept their offer, try to negotiate with them further or try going it on my ow,
I plan to think about this for a few days, talk to some people I trust and then decide how to proceed.
At this point, this is really a negotiating strategy dilemma, not a legal situation. But if people want to weigh in with thoughts, feel free. I would be especially interested in thoughts on my chances of collecting settlement on my own if I tried to go that route.
Thanks.
