LOL at the idea that the typical PI lawyer is making millions. Makes for a nice villain story though, probably a very effective story.

I don’t practice in P.I., but if enacted, this probably means legally meritorious, but financially marginal cases never get representation, and consequently in many cases, no recovery at all.

But sure, tell us how you’re standing up for the little guy, proponents.

Interesting. So why would Uber choose to back this particular initiative? Do they anticipate having to defend a slew of low-value claims in the near future and are hoping that freezing contingency fees for such low-level claims will result in no attorneys taking the cases?

Regardless, as a Plaintiff’s attorney who has never had to advertise on a billboard, a word of advice to Uber: when a company makes individual litigation unfeasible either as a result of over-litigation, unreasonable settlement postures, or otherwise, it just opens the door to exploration of resolution of claims on a class-wide basis; and when companies as large as Uber make mistakes, they often do so at a systemic manner. So assuming they are successful, Uber and every other large company in Nevada supporting this initiative may deeply regret the fruits of their temporary success.

Yeah – but its not Uber. Its Nevadans for Fair Recovery, which is “Uber and a handful of Nevada business groups”. This could also be almost every P&C carrier in Nevada. Who is this group? Not listed with NVSOS, webpage doesn’t load and no other information. The article doesn’t list who the spokesperson is either.

Admittedly I am no fan of the current system. Auto insurance rates have gone up 36% in Nevada (double the national average) and were already high to begin with. We have a few features and peculiarities in Nevada which contribute to this. Clark county Juries, disclosure of policy limits, loose treatments etc.

I don’t do PI, but does a jury get told how much the Plaintiff’s attorney is getting from a verdict? If so, how exactly is it that the percentage the attorney gets has anything to do with how much money the jury awards? Honestly, it seems like this will have unintended consequences. 20% will become the new 33% and the cases will magically have higher medical bills than before.

P.I. 20 per cent. Personal injury attorney here who has been in the business 25 years or more. In many other jurisdictions, there have been limits placed on the percentage of fees charged by personal injury attorneys. Generally 1/3 is the uppermost limits. Forty percent that is common here for cases litigated is unheard of. Many jurisdictions limit or put a cap on fees. This is done by court rule. Quite frankly, the fees charged here in Nevada are obscene. Some attorneys who have advertised “We Won’t Take More than You ” have addressed this problem. Some clients are able to negotiate lower fees when they shop their case. Certainly a demand letter settlement should only be 20 per cent. Cases that are litigated merit thirty more cent or even
1/3. More than that is outrageous. Reform is coming. It is just when it is coming and how it is coming. Something must be done to protect innocent tort victims. Not sure that this Uber backed plan is the way to go. But it is a start. Court approval should be required on cases where more than 1/3 is charged. Forty per cent should be the exception not the rule. Clients are getting ripped off with inflated medical liens, inflated costs and high per centage contingency fees.

We have two camera access hearings coming up this week. Stay tuned!