The Ethics of Contingency Fees in the American Justice System

Abstract

The contingency fee system’s crucial role in our justice system is unarguable. But what is arguable is the ethics concerning the system. Ethical controversy has surrounded contingency fees since their implementation. Do contingency fees incentivize lawyers to take advantage of clients, or do they foster client-lawyer cooperation? Do they increase the number of frivolous lawsuits, or do they help to maintain case legitimacy? Do they hinder the quality of legal representation by lawyers, or do they promote it? In this thesis, I explore these questions and many more. Starting with a consideration of the most prevalent ethical praises and criticisms of the system, I delve deep into the ethical conversation, including bringing data to bear to reinforce or debunk existing arguments, brainstorming policies to ethically enhance the system, and examining real life contingency fee cases to uncover new ethical problems. This thesis provides an in-depth look at a system that constitutes a major part of American legal justice and works to resolve the ethical controversy surrounding it. Doing so may prove to be invaluable for American citizens, for ethically enhancing the contingency fee system can lead to an ethical improvement of the entire justice system.