The Ethical Dilemma of Contingent Fees in Legal Representation

Is it permissible for the attorney to charge the client one-third of the million dollars as a fee based on the scenario?

a) Yes, a fee may be contingent on the outcome of the matter, and the attorney complied with all the requirements in the Model Rules for written disclosures about the terms of the fee.

b) Yes, the fee was reasonable given how quickly the attorney was able to obtain the full amount the client was hoping to recover, and the attorney complied with all the requirements in the Model Rules for written disclosures about the terms of the fee.

c) No, it is not reasonable for the attorney to charge over three hundred thousand dollars in fees for making one phone call at the end of the first consultation with the client.

d) No, an attorney cannot charge a contingent fee without first initiating litigation by filing pleadings in court.

Answer:

The attorney is permitted to charge the client the agreed one-third fee, even without litigation, as all of the Model Rules were followed.

Given the scenario, the attorney has the right to charge the client a fee of one-third of the million dollars, despite the absence of litigation. Option a) is correct: a fee may be contingent on the outcome of the matter, and the attorney fulfilled all requirements according to the Model Rules concerning disclosures about the terms of the fee. The agreement between the client and the attorney was clearly explained and signed in the engagement contract. Even though the attorney quickly settled the case with one phone call, which could seem unreasonable, the decision should be judged based on the agreed percentage (one-third) and not on the time spent on the case.