Court Opinion

ID: 4712494
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2021-08-12 00:38:14.039601+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:07:13.709825
License: Public Domain

Sanders, J.
(concurring) — I concur only because “Mr. Brothers has conceded that he violated RPC 1.5(a) by charging an excessive fee.” Majority at 584. However, in the context of a flat or contingent fee agreement, the services actually rendered as viewed through the lens of 20-20 hindsight do not necessarily an “excessive fee” make. Absent other factors, I would protect the right of clients and attorneys to freely contract for agreed compensation to be paid for agreed services. Thus I believe the majority opinion should not be taken as an invitation to rewrite, or second guess, retainer agreements between attorneys and clients.