Court Opinion

ID: 9507619
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 21:24:18.966596+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:07:21.583467
License: Public Domain

MR. JUSTICE MORRISON,
dissenting:
I dissent in part.
In my opinion the result reached by the majority is correct except for rejection of the 40 percent contingent fee contract adopted between claimant and his attorney. This contract was approved by the Division and under the rationale of the opinion should be transferred to the insurance company unless there is strong evidence rejecting that contract as being unreasonable. There was a confidential relationship existing between attorney and client but there is no indication that the attorney abused that relationship. In fact the majority opinion recognizes that the contingent fee contract was adjusted because it was lower than the contracts normally approved for the same or similar representation.
Under the rationale that we adopt in this case, the 40 percent contingent fee contract, once approved by the Division, should be accepted by the Worker’s Compensation Court as reasonable absent the requisite countervailing evidence. Here there is none. Therefore, the 40 percent contingent fee should be paid by the insurance carrier.