4 ms·

> It should be law that lawyers can't have more than something like 5% of the settlement Then finding a lawyer willing to go through the long and complex class

by MikeUt 6y ago

> It should be law that lawyers can't have more than something like 5% of the settlement Then finding a lawyer willing to go through the long and complex class action lawsuit will be even harder and/or more expensive, resulting in fewer class-action suits, meaning the punishment for these scams will be even more unlikely than it is now. Even if lawyers got 100% of the settlement, class actions would still be worth it as deterrent.

istjohn 6y ago
But this isn't a punishment at all. I just don't believe that it's not possible to more closely align the interests of class action lawyers with that of the classes they represent. It doesn't seem like it's difficult to find lawyers willing to initiate class action lawsuits today. They just never seem to amount to much more than a pay day for the lawyers.
- exabrial 6y ago
  correct: right now the interests of the lawyers are aligned with the people they're suing, not the people they're representing.
- MikeUt 6y ago
  > I just don't believe that it's not possible to more closely align the interests of class action lawyers with that of the classes they represent. But how does capping the settlement % that goes to the lawyers achieve that?
  - istjohn 6y ago
    Yeah, I'm not sure that's the right solution either. Perhaps there could be a third party "class advocate" that receives 1% of all proceeds awarded to the class in the case of a settlement or trial victory who has unilatteral power to veto any settlement agreement. Then their incentives would be aligned to ensure the maximum settlement while taking into account the probability of winning in court and the costs of prolonged delay, etc. If the class gets nothing, the class advocate gets nothing. If the lawyers make bank, but the class gets a pittance, the class advocate gets a pittance. The class advocate could also negotiate reasonable attorney fees for the class.

by MikeUt 6y ago

istjohn 6y ago

But this isn't a punishment at all. I just don't believe that it's not possible to more closely align the interests of class action lawyers with that of the classes they represent. It doesn't seem like it's difficult to find lawyers willing to initiate class action lawsuits today. They just never seem to amount to much more than a pay day for the lawyers.

exabrial 6y ago
correct: right now the interests of the lawyers are aligned with the people they're suing, not the people they're representing.
MikeUt 6y ago
> I just don't believe that it's not possible to more closely align the interests of class action lawyers with that of the classes they represent. But how does capping the settlement % that goes to the lawyers achieve that?
- istjohn 6y ago
  Yeah, I'm not sure that's the right solution either. Perhaps there could be a third party "class advocate" that receives 1% of all proceeds awarded to the class in the case of a settlement or trial victory who has unilatteral power to veto any settlement agreement. Then their incentives would be aligned to ensure the maximum settlement while taking into account the probability of winning in court and the costs of prolonged delay, etc. If the class gets nothing, the class advocate gets nothing. If the lawyers make bank, but the class gets a pittance, the class advocate gets a pittance. The class advocate could also negotiate reasonable attorney fees for the class.