<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Neuborne dispute not over after all	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.overlawyered.com/2008/01/neuborne-dispute-not-over-after-all/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2008/01/neuborne-dispute-not-over-after-all/</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 May 2008 10:55:22 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: kdfljd ksah		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2008/01/neuborne-dispute-not-over-after-all/comment-page-1/#comment-10509</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[kdfljd ksah]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jan 2008 18:01:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/wpblog/?p=5798#comment-10509</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The average judgment in the U.S. is $51,000, despite the publics fascination with windfall verdicts. If the contingency fee is 1%, that would be $510 for every SUCCESSFUL claim. Go ahead and take your own best guess at how many claims an attorney can successfully pursue, but after cost of operating and the risk of having the claim fail, it would hardly make any claim other than the highly unusual and extraordinary worth their time
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The average judgment in the U.S. is $51,000, despite the publics fascination with windfall verdicts. If the contingency fee is 1%, that would be $510 for every SUCCESSFUL claim. Go ahead and take your own best guess at how many claims an attorney can successfully pursue, but after cost of operating and the risk of having the claim fail, it would hardly make any claim other than the highly unusual and extraordinary worth their time</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Mahlon		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2008/01/neuborne-dispute-not-over-after-all/comment-page-1/#comment-10508</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mahlon]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jan 2008 11:41:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/wpblog/?p=5798#comment-10508</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Indeed.  Of course, this is not a typical &quot;contingent fee&quot; case.  Neuborne started without any expectation of getting paid.  Your run of the mill PI attorney doesn&#039;t have that luxury.  There is risk assumed by the lawyer in contingent fee cases that should be compensated.  Still, paying contingent fees based on a multiple of actual fees (say 2 to 3 times actual time at a reasonable rate) would do much to reduce abuse.  It would certainly allow for much quicker settlement of legitimate claims.
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Indeed.  Of course, this is not a typical &#8220;contingent fee&#8221; case.  Neuborne started without any expectation of getting paid.  Your run of the mill PI attorney doesn&#8217;t have that luxury.  There is risk assumed by the lawyer in contingent fee cases that should be compensated.  Still, paying contingent fees based on a multiple of actual fees (say 2 to 3 times actual time at a reasonable rate) would do much to reduce abuse.  It would certainly allow for much quicker settlement of legitimate claims.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
