Legal Question in Medical Malpractice in Illinois

Re: contingencies

If you are wealthy, such a system would be an interesting option. Many attorneys would be happy to represent injury victims for a prepaid hourly rate. Few victims, in reality, would ever choose such an option. Malpractice cases require a high level of expertise, so the rate for such a specialist would likely be 2-400 per hour. Malpractice cases are incredibly expensive, 50-200,000 is the typical expense outlay, without fees.

Malpractice victims typically have devastating injuries, which means that they are not able to work. How many such victims would have the money to pursue their claim? What senior citizen would dare risk their future pursuing a claim if they had to pay for the attorney?

Also, under the contingency fee system, Attorneys who are experts decide which cases have merit. What lawyer would risk his time and money on a truly meritless case? On the other hand, if a client is footing the bill, the attorney has no incentive to refuse the case, so there is more expense to the healthcare providers to defend meritless cases. Many cases of true malpractice do not get pursued because of the high cost and low possibility of return. Likewise, most cases without merit are weeded out of the system because of the financial interest of the attorney.

Keeping people out of the court room, and thereby benefitting negligent businesses, is the real reason that scoundrels want to cut contingent attorney fees. Folks with this agenda have no interest in reducing fees to victims, but know that if you take the lawyers away, fewer victims will pursue their rights- have you EVER heard of a plan to put caps on civil defense costs?