Contingent Fee

A contingent fee is a lawyer’s fee that is based upon a percentage of the money awarded to the client. Generally, contingent fees are on-third of the total recovery. The widespread use of the contingent fee is unique to the American civil justice system. Contingent fees allow plaintiffs with little money to seek redress in the courts because the attorney bears the financial risk of bringing a lawsuit in exchange for a percentage of the recovery, if any. In recent years, the current system has benefited lawyers at the expense of their clients.

The Problem

The contingent fee system invites abuse because it encourages lawyers with a financial interest in the outcome of a case to try meritless claims or ask for unreasonably high awards. Contingent fees are generally one-third of a total award, even when, as is often the case, attorneys bear no risk in taking a case. Attorneys today seek out cases that can be settled easily, with little work, or can be decided under no-fault laws. The one-third contingent fee pay-off for seeking such cases is disproportionate and discourages lawyers from taking more difficult, work-intensive, cases.

ATRA’s Position

ATRA supports legislation that limits the use of contingent fees in cases where a legitimate risk of non-recovery exists, and requires an hourly fee in cases where no legitimate risk of non-recovery exists, such as cases involving automobile accidents and other incidents where the parties are likely to settle, and cases where strict liability is imposed, such that no liability question exists to be resolved at trial.

ATRA also supports legislation that provides a sliding scale for the award of contingent fees. A sliding scale removes some of the incentive for lawyers to seek excessive jury awards, while preserving for plaintiffs the access to the civil justice system that the contingent fee system provides.

ATRA also supports legislation requiring an attorney to provide clients up front with an estimate of what the hourly rate for a case would be versus the applicable contingent fee charge. The client would be free to choose the payment method under which they would like to proceed. After disposal of a case, an attorney would disclose the number of hours actually spent resolving the case and the amount of the hourly fee or the contingent fees due. Fully informed clients would be able to compare attorneys’ fees and go in to fee arrangements with realistic expectations.

Search Through ATRA Reforms

Search through all of ATRA's reforms around Contingent Fee
Contingent Fee Reform: HB 350 (1996).
Prohibits the assessment of contingent fees for expert witnesses.  The comprehensive 1996 tort reform law violated the doctrine of separation of power...
Ohio
Contingent Fee Reform: HB 350 (1996).
Prohibits the assessment of contingent fees for expert witnesses.  The comprehensive 1996 tort reform law violated the doctrine of separation of power...
Ohio
Transparency in Private Attorney Contracting: S.B. 648 (2014)
Ensures that should the state award contingency fee contracts that they are awarded openly and transparently and that the state would receive maximum ...
North Carolina
Transparency in Private Attorney Contracts
This bill codifies the Louisiana Supreme Court decision in Meredith v. Ieyoub.  It says the state cannot compensate attorneys on a contingency fee bas...
Louisiana


Contingent Fee News and Press

Explore ATRA's most recent press releases and blogs around Contingent Fee

Texas Now on Judicial Hellholes® “Watch List” as Political Lawsuits, Junk Science Spread

The American Tort Reform Foundation today placed Texas on the Judicial Hel...

American Tort Reform Association Responds to Confirmation of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. as HHS Secretary

Today, the U.S. Senate confirmed Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. to serve as Secret...

RFK Jr.’s Trial Lawyer Ties Raise Red Flags

This was originally published by The Well News. Robert F. Kennedy J...

Search Resources

Search through all of ATRA's Amicus Briefs, Reports, and Other Resources around Contingent Fee
Search All
States
Status
Post Types
Date
Blade v. Sig Saurer
(E.D. Pa., filed April 6, 2026): Arguing that the court should grant Sig Saurer’s motion for reconsideration because Mallory upends the jurisdictiona...
Eastern District of Pennsylvania
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Suquilanda v. Skyway Roofing, Inc.
(Ma., filed March 18, 2026): Urging the court to decline to recognize a new cause of action permitting employees of a subcontractor to sue a contract...
Massachusetts
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Letter Urging Veto or Amendments to House Bill 449 / Senate Bill 229 in Virginia
...
Corporate Flight from Delaware: The Impact of Escalating Shareholder Litigation and Legal Uncertainty
Unpredictable court rulings and a wave of lawyer-driven, profit-seeking litigation are destabilizing Delaware’s historic dominance for corporat...
Delaware
New York Local Legal Services Advertising 2024-2025
Trial lawyers and aggregators increasingly spend large sums of money on television, digital, and print advertising to recruit new clients. In 2025, i...
New York
Murphy v. Rio Rancho Center
(New Mex. Ct. App., filed March 5, 2026): Arguing that the double-digit punitive multipliers likely violate due process. The U.S. Supreme Court has s...
New Mexico
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Monsanto v. Durnell
(U.S., filed March 2, 2026): Arguing that requirements for herbicide labeling should not be made case-by-case in litigation sparked by a flawed IARC ...
SCOTUS
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Cowan v. Dr. Slann et.al.
(N.D., filed February 23, 2026): Arguing that reasonable limits on medical liability improve the health care system for doctors and patients and Nort...
North Dakota
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Oregon Local Legal Services Advertising 2021-2025
Trial lawyers and aggregators increasingly spend large sums of money on television, digital,and print advertising to recruit new clients. In 2025, it...
Oregon
The Junk Science Playbook
The Machine That Sparks and Supports Mass Tort Litigation Introduction and Executive Summary Mass tort litigation is a sprawling, profit-driven...



The American Tort Reform Association is the nation’s first organization dedicated exclusively to reforming the civil justice system through education and legislative enactment.

To receive occasional updates from ATRA, enter your email address:
By subscribing, you agree to our Privacy Policy and consent to receive updates.
© 2026 ATRA. All rights reserved.