In "Piece of the Pie", InsideCounsel reporter Melissa Maleske highlights this month how contingency fee arrangements have "become increasingly commonplace–and not just among plaintiffs in slip-and-fall cases, but in corporate America as well." She also goes on to discuss problems that may arise in contingent fee deals.
The first case involved a client
The dissent charges that our decision “suggests a visceral distaste of class actions”. We disagree. We simply think that the rights of ten million vehicle owners and lessees across the United States should not be adjudicated in an action brought by three plaintiffs who cannot show more than the merest possibility of injury to themselves.
Three years after it heard argument on whether to allow certification of a nationwide class, the Supreme Court of Texas held today that the three individuals who brought the case had no business complaining about dangerous seatbelts in their automobiles. DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Inman, No. 03-1189 (Tex. Feb. 1, 2008).
Texas Appellate Law Blog
The Federal Circuit today upheld an East Texas jury’s award of $73,991,964 to TiVo for patent infringement by satellite television provider EchoStar. TiVo, Inc. v. EchoStar Communications, No. 06-1574 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 31, 2008).
The court overturned the district court’s judgment to the extent it held EchoStar liable for deployment of infringing hardware —
By Blawgletter’s count, the Justices have completed more than half of the days they’ve devoted in the 2007 term to oral arguments — 23 out of 40. That leaves 17, but we can detect little bidness meat on the remaining bone.
The biggest case on the docket already produced a 5-3 decision — Stoneridge Investment
Did Learned Hand wield a whimsical gavel?
On matters of justice, we must trust in the wisdom of our founders and empower judges who understand that the Constitution means what it says. I’ve submitted judicial nominees who will rule by the letter of the law, not the whim of the gavel.
Last month, Blawgletter reported that the Sixth Circuit Anticipates Supreme Court Decision Sub Silentio. The rascals have done it again — this time without the sub silentio.
In Tullis v. UMB Bank, N.A., No. 06-4632 & 06-4633 (6th Cir. Jan. 28, 2008) yesterday, the court reached the same conclusion that it did
In her On Balance column today, Washington Poster Leslie Morgan Steiner shines a light on the, um, reluctance of "the largest, most prestigious" law firms to acknowledge "work-life balance".
She cites a FACTS program, by the founder of FlexTime Lawyers, for making work and life friends again:
Fixed — More predictable
Contingent fee fundamentals. A contingent fee pays a trial lawyer solely out of the benefits he obtains for his client. No benefits, no fee. Big benefits, big fee.
Contingent fee arrangements can be but aren’t necessarily complex. Today we’ll talk about some important variables.
Gross sum recovered. In Blawgletter’s firm, the standard engagement
Chester Carlson (1906-68) invented xerography. Eastman Kodak validated antitrust lawsuits against photocopier lessors (and others) that tie parts and service to the lease.
Eastman Kodak lives! The Ninth Circuit today applied Eastman Kodak Co. v. Image Technical Services, Inc., 504 U.S. 41 (1992), to validate an antitrust complaint against a copier leasing company