Politics for Pros- moderated Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

From: LindyBill	12/12/2005 2:54:17 AM
	of 793914

Annals of overreaching legal fees Overlawyered blog An appeals court in Missouri has ruled (Susan Mello v. Anita Davis and McDonnell-Douglas) that a lawyer who represented a client in an employment claim is not entitled to collect 35% of her client’s future salary and benefits by way of a claimed contingent fee. Best (if somewhat unsettling) quote from the court's caustic opinion: if it was Mello’s intent to have her client surrender 35 to 45% of all future earnings until the welcome hand of death freed her from this servitude, the contract needed to say as much. overlawyered.com

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next