Posted: 4/11/2025 6:56:33 PM EDT
|
Somebody I know has a pretty solid retaliation and wrongful termination claim against their former employer. First lawyer he talked to wanted a retainer though. He's got a solid, textbook case of retaliation, and the former employer has deep pockets and has demonstrated that they're acting in bad faith. Any reason he should be considering retainer-based representation instead of counsel who will take it on contingency? From everything I've read, contingency is the more common option in cases like this. |
My Preferred Pronouns: His Excellency, His Excellency's, Your Excellency
Life Member: NRA-Benefactor|SAF|CCRKBA|GOA|JPFO
Member: ISRA
NRA-ILA FAL
Instructor: NRA Pistol, RSO|UT CFP|IL FCCL
A.F.&A.M. - 32° A.A.S.R. - Knight Templar
Life Member: NRA-Benefactor|SAF|CCRKBA|GOA|JPFO
Member: ISRA
NRA-ILA FAL
Instructor: NRA Pistol, RSO|UT CFP|IL FCCL
A.F.&A.M. - 32° A.A.S.R. - Knight Templar
|
You said he. Is he a member of a protected class? Is it in an at will employment state? I’m not a lawyer but I know someone going through an EEOC case with one. Maybe someone will come along that can help, but from what I’ve seen so far it’s nothing like you would think it is. The company won’t care, and the EEOC can be close to useless. If he’s a white male it may not even matter. For most employment claims you have to be a member of a protected class. Protected classes include: Race Color Ethnicity or national origin Age Gender or gender identity Sexual orientation Religion Disability Genetic information (like medical history) |
Lawyers and doctors, they get paid whether you win or lose.  I would not want a lawyer that didn't charge by the hour or I paid on retainer. The rest (commission-based $$$ if they win) seem to be somewhat sub-par - just my observation over the years. |
"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition" - Rudyard Kipling
|
Originally Posted By First-World-Problems: You said he. Is he a member of a protected class? Is it in an at will employment state? I’m not a lawyer but I know someone going through an EEOC case with one. Maybe someone will come along that can help, but from what I’ve seen so far it’s nothing like you would think it is. The company won’t care, and the EEOC can be close to useless. If he’s a white male it may not even matter. For most employment claims you have to be a member of a protected class. Protected classes include: Race Color Ethnicity or national origin Age Gender or gender identity Sexual orientation Religion Disability Genetic information (like medical history) Whistleblower. Retaliated against within a week of filling a regulatory complaint after management refused to act (so they knew it was him). Complaint alleged a violation of labor laws and an employer trying to force the individual to violate professional ethics (like the kind of professional ethics that get a license revoked). |
My Preferred Pronouns: His Excellency, His Excellency's, Your Excellency
Life Member: NRA-Benefactor|SAF|CCRKBA|GOA|JPFO
Member: ISRA
NRA-ILA FAL
Instructor: NRA Pistol, RSO|UT CFP|IL FCCL
A.F.&A.M. - 32° A.A.S.R. - Knight Templar
Life Member: NRA-Benefactor|SAF|CCRKBA|GOA|JPFO
Member: ISRA
NRA-ILA FAL
Instructor: NRA Pistol, RSO|UT CFP|IL FCCL
A.F.&A.M. - 32° A.A.S.R. - Knight Templar
|
I practice employment law. Not many take cases on a contingency basis, and those that do often do so on a hybrid basis with some sort of flat fee, plus the client paying costs. Costs can be quite high, $3-5k per deposition, $10-20k in expert fees, couple hundred per month for research and e-discovery tools, etc. When you take a contingency case and get far down the litigation road, and then the client runs out of money to fund the case, it all falls apart. When that happens, the contingency attorney isn't getting paid. As a result, most attorneys taking cases on a contingency basis aren't going to trial, and some won't even litigate. They just try to settle the case and deal with the admin processes such as EEOC and DOL filings. By contrast, an attorney on a traditional retainer will generally be willing to go to trial. Defense counsel often knows who is who, and they value and treat cases accordingly. |
|
Originally Posted By Cooper1: How do poor people get justice? They often don't. The EEOC is just a rubber stamp to get your right to use letter for discrimination. Rarely does the EEOC take cases. Folks have a little more success with unpaid wage cases, depending on the location. DC imposes up to 4x damages plus attorney's fees at heightened rates, so folks there can usually find good contingency representation. In contrast, here in FL, attorneys fees are a "may" and it's basically treated like breach of contract outside of minimum wage and OT issues. Whistleblower law isn't practiced by a ton of experienced folks. Depending on the subject, you can file at OSHA, but those investigators are generally overworked and your luck may vary. Litigating before the DOL is not a whole lot easier than litigating in a typical court. Then there's the fact that they are poor, so damages can easily be dwarfed by the fees, and there just isn't much to take a contingency out of. |
|
Originally Posted By davewvu86: I practice employment law. Not many take cases on a contingency basis, and those that do often do so on a hybrid basis with some sort of flat fee, plus the client paying costs. Costs can be quite high, $3-5k per deposition, $10-20k in expert fees, couple hundred per month for research and e-discovery tools, etc. When you take a contingency case and get far down the litigation road, and then the client runs out of money to fund the case, it all falls apart. When that happens, the contingency attorney isn't getting paid. As a result, most attorneys taking cases on a contingency basis aren't going to trial, and some won't even litigate. They just try to settle the case and deal with the admin processes such as EEOC and DOL filings. By contrast, an attorney on a traditional retainer will generally be willing to go to trial. Defense counsel often knows who is who, and they value and treat cases accordingly. PM |
"Bad spellers of the world, UNTIE!!!"
".....it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."
".....it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."