Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Ethics Blogs -> Legal Ethics Forum
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Ethics
: Legal Ethics ForumCotchett firm wins a big, not unconscionable fee from a sophisticated client
Seven times lodestar is pretty sweet, but when it was part of an agreement between a sophisticated firm and a sophisticated client to share risks and benefits, it's not "unconscionable." Opinion from the California Court of Appeal is here.
(Note: in ABA jurisdictions, the fee must be "reasonable." In California, the fee cannot be "unconscionable." The list of factors the courts look at are essentially the same under the two approaches, and it's not clear to me how often, if ever, the difference in terminology makes a difference.)
Full post as published by Legal Ethics Forum on September 01, 2010 (boomark / email).
Daimler Chrysler et al.
alleged negligence pertaining to lost confidential client data which exposed customers to identity theft
California Firm Recalls Ready-To-Eat Pork Products
California Firm Recalls Ready-To-Eat Pork Products
Colorado Firm Recalls Beef Products
Due To Possible E. coli Contamination
South Carolina Firm
Recalls Frozen Meat and Poultry Products
FedEx
Ground Business Model Wins Class Action in Washington
Asbestos Mesothelioma Victim Wins Appeal of $20 Million Asbestos Cancer Verdict
Asbestos Mesothelioma Victim Wins Appeal of $20 Million Asbestos Cancer Verdict

Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy v. Universal Paragon Corp. (Cal. Ct. App. -
Claims Against Referring Firm Reinstated
Bonus to law firm for reductions in law suits for and against the client







