This election, Nevadans will vote on whether to cap contingency fees for attorneys at 20%. Not surprisingly, trial attorneys across the state are opposed, with some saying such a cap would prohibit them from representing clients. A few make this even more explicit: arguing that a 20% cap would make it harder for victims of sexual assault to retain legal counsel.
Are these attorneys really saying they won’t represent sexual assault victims unless they can pocket more than 20% of the victim’s award or damages? Should they really be saying that out loud? Given how many of the loudest opponents are millionaires, it feels disingenuous at best.
The PAC behind the ballot initiative, Nevadans for Fair Recovery, says the goal of the initiative is to put more money in victims’ pockets by limiting the amount of money the attorney takes to 20%. That means victims would have more money to cover medical bills and other expenses. A recent survey found that 81% of Nevada voters support the fee cap.
As it stands, attorneys in Nevada frequently take almost half of their clients’ awards and damages, and they aren’t happy about potentially only being able to claim 20%. One attorney, Derek Gupta, who isn't even from Nevada, has expressed opposition to the initiative.
Let’s do some math: earlier this year, a judge approved a $125 million settlement for a case in which individuals who use the federal judiciary’s PACER court records system were overcharged. The plaintiffs’ lawyers, including Deepak Gupta, were awarded $23.9 million of the settlement, as well as $1.1 million to cover their fees. Plaintiffs in the case were awarded a mere $350 per person as reimbursement for being overcharged to use the PACER system.
$25 million is exactly 20% of $125 million. That’s $5,000,000 per lawyer for Mr. Gupta if he split the winnings among a five-person legal team, or 14,000 times more than what the victims saw.
Given that, are we really concerned trial lawyers wouldn’t take the case if they only made 10,000 times more than their clients?
To level set, the average yearly salary in Nevada is just under 59k. Assuming that person had no expenses and paid no taxes, it would take the average Nevadan over 84 years to earn $5 million.
By voicing opposition to the contingency fee cap, these attorneys are exposing who they really are: people who care more about funding their lavish lifestyles than they do about their clients.