contingent legal fee agreement pursuant to Judiciary Law § 474-
a(2)1 .
On October 11, 1994, plaintiffs, individually and as co-
administrators of Seth Speken’s estate (hereinafter the "Estate"),
commenced this action against defendants. The complaint contains
two causes of action. One was for pain and suffering and the
other was for wrongful death. Plaintiffs allege that the Hospital
failed to properly treat Seth Speken’s condition during the period
August 21, 1993 to August 27, 1993, and that this departure from
appropriate medical standards proximately caused Seth Speken’s
death (Complaint, ¶ 13).
On October 12, 1994, Moore engaged Frank as trial counsel to
prosecute this action on behalf of plaintiffs. Pursuant to a
written agreement, Moore agreed to pay Frank 2/3 of the contingent
fee. A notice of Frank’s retainer was
filed with the Judicial Conference,
indicating that Frank was to receive the standard statutory fee, and
that Moore, as attorney of record,
was to receive a fee "equal to the
same percentage of attorneys’ fee that the attorneys’ fee bears to the
total recovery"
__________________________________
1 Judiciary Law § 474-a(2) establishes a mandatory fee
schedule for attorneys who are retained to prosecute
medical malpractice claims on a contingent fee basis.
The schedule limits attorney’s fees by applying the
following correlations: 30% of the first $250,000 of
the sum recovered; 25% of the next $250,000 of the
sum recovered; 20% of the next $500,000 of the sum
recovered; 15% of the next $250,000 of the sum
the sum recovered.
Click for Previous
Page
Click for Next Page (4/29)
Click for Preface