The Contingent Fee and the Unhappy Client
Marlowe, a solo practitioner in Little Rock, agrees to represent Tessa in a personal injury suit on a one-third contingency. The written fee agreement is signed. Marlowe advances $12,000 in litigation costs. Midway through discovery, Tessa wants to settle for $90,000; Marlowe advises against it, believing the case is worth $300,000. Tessa insists. Marlowe refuses to sign the settlement release unless Tessa agrees to pay the full one-third fee on the $90,000 plus all advanced costs. Tessa fires Marlowe and hires new counsel, who settles for $95,000. Marlowe sues Tessa for quantum meruit and asserts a retaining lien on the file. The case is in Arkansas state court.
1. Is Marlowe entitled to the full one-third contingency fee? Analyze the fee agreement and the client's right to settle.
Read the worked answer
Client autonomy. A client has the absolute right to settle a case over her lawyer's objection. A lawyer may not use the fee agreement to veto settlement. Any provision conditioning the lawyer's cooperation on a higher fee is unenforceable as against public policy.
Contingency fee on a settlement the client rejected. Marlowe is not entitled to the full one-third of $95,000. When a client discharges a contingency-fee lawyer without cause, the lawyer may recover in quantum meruit - the reasonable value of services rendered - not the full contract fee. The contingency is not triggered because the lawyer did not complete the representation; the new lawyer's work produced the settlement.
Reasonableness. Under Arkansas Rule of Professional Conduct 1.5, fees must be reasonable. Demanding a full third plus costs on a settlement the lawyer opposed is unreasonable and likely a disciplinary violation. Marlowe's recovery is limited to the reasonable value of his services, possibly measured by the percentage of work completed, subject to the new lawyer's fee being satisfied first.
2. Can Marlowe assert a retaining lien on Tessa's file?
Read the worked answer
Retaining lien. Arkansas recognizes an attorney's retaining lien on client papers in the lawyer's possession until fees are paid. However, the lien is subject to the client's need for the file to prosecute the case. Under Rule 1.16(d), a lawyer must surrender papers and property to which the client is entitled upon termination.
Balance. The lawyer may retain the file only to the extent necessary to secure a reasonable fee, and must not prejudice the client's case. Courts typically order the file produced upon the client posting security or paying undisputed costs. Because Tessa needs the file for the pending settlement, the court will likely require Marlowe to turn it over, preserving his quantum meruit claim against the settlement proceeds.
Costs. Marlowe may recover the $12,000 in advanced costs from the settlement, since those are client obligations, but only reasonable and documented amounts.
3. How should the court allocate the $95,000 settlement between Marlowe and successor counsel?
Read the worked answer
The court applies a quantum meruit analysis, often using the lodestar or a percentage-of-completion approach. Factors: time and labor, novelty and difficulty, skill required, preclusion of other employment, customary fee, results obtained, and whether the fee is fixed or contingent.
Practical allocation. Successor counsel's contingency fee is paid first from the fund; Marlowe's quantum meruit is paid from the remainder, capped so the client is not double-charged. If successor counsel's work was minimal because Marlowe developed the case, Marlowe may receive a larger share. The client must net a fair recovery. The court should not award Marlowe more than the reasonable value of his services, and should deduct the $12,000 in costs before splitting fees.