Linus Tech Tips

3799 readers

1 users here now

~~⚠️ De-clickbait-ify the youtube titles or your post will be removed!~~

~~Floatplane titles are perfectly fine.~~

~~LTT/LMG community. Brought to you by ******... Actually, no, not this time. This time it's brought to you by Lemmy, the open communities and free and open source software!~~

~~If you post videos from Youtube/LTT, please please un-clickbait the titles. (You can use the title from https://nitter.net/LTTtranslator/ but it doesn't seem to have been updated in quite some while...)~~

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

2446

Madison on why she quit (lemmy.ml)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

701 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Some updates I got from threadreaderapp:

Link to the thread provided by @[email protected].

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Lawyers who work on contingency (no win - no fee) have a lot of caveats.

They usually work on easy, open and shut cases. The more likely they are to win the more likely they are to get paid.
They usually take a much bigger chunk of the plaintiff's winnings if they do win, so even a win is much less of a win than otherwise.
Even if they work for a larger firm, most lawyers who work on contingency don't have the resources, or can't justify using firm resources, on a risky case that entails a lot of work. This might result in incomplete discovery, or the other side buying a one-person operation in paper.
I mean this in the nicest possible way, and this is a generalization, but most lawyers choose not to work on contingency if they have other work. This often means (and of course there are exceptions) that contingency lawyers are not the cream of the crop, especially compared to whatever big firm lawyers a company can retain.