Return to search

The effects of contingent and hourly fees on litigation outcomes

This thesis uses a theoretical model to consider whether plaintiffs paying lawyers on a contingent fee basis receive smaller payoffs than those retaining lawyers on an hourly basis. This is the view in England, where contingent fees are illegal. It is also a view recognised in America, where contingent fees are legal and commonly used in some areas of law. The issue revolves around whether contingent fee lawyers will settle cases too soon for their clients to receive a substantial settlement offer. In an incomplete information, multiperiod bargaining model of personal injury litigation, we show that this need not be true: even if lawyers are self-interested, plaintiffs can receive higher payoffs under contingent fees than under hourly ones. Considerable ambiguity surrounds plaintiffs' preferred fee arrangement and the speed at which any settlement occurs under the different fee contracts. The most crucial role in this comparison is played by the distribution of legal expenses between plaintiffs and their lawyers. Our model therefore confirms the payoff ambiguity found in previous literature while being the first to address the settlement timing issue. It also suggests that the issue of how different fee arrangements affect the plaintiff in litigation is somewhat more complicated than policy debates on both sides of the Atlantic have implied.

Identiferoai:union.ndltd.org:LACETR/oai:collectionscanada.gc.ca:QMM.28898
Date January 1995
CreatorsRickman, Neil
ContributorsLong, N. V. (advisor), Hogan, S. D. (advisor)
PublisherMcGill University
Source SetsLibrary and Archives Canada ETDs Repository / Centre d'archives des thèses électroniques de Bibliothèque et Archives Canada
LanguageEnglish
Detected LanguageEnglish
TypeElectronic Thesis or Dissertation
Formatapplication/pdf
CoverageDoctor of Philosophy (Department of Economics.)
RightsAll items in eScholarship@McGill are protected by copyright with all rights reserved unless otherwise indicated.
Relationalephsysno: 001460397, proquestno: NN05782, Theses scanned by UMI/ProQuest.

Page generated in 0.0019 seconds