According to my math education, 10% of 90k is only 9k. Therefore, anything over $99,000.00 generates fees for the plaintif. It’s not 10% of the award after all, but 10% of the amount stated as being a fair settlement. Now, since we’re dealing with lawyers, simple math may be beyond them in some cases. After all, lawyers think a $5 coupon for me, and $5m for them is a “fair settlement”, showing that working with numbers is outside their wheelhouse. 😀
Computer science is after all just a fancy form of math. 😀

Say the panel comes out with $100,000. 10%, of course, is $10,000. So, if the result is $90,000 to $110,000, each pays the other’s fees. Under $90,000, and plaintiff pays for defendant’s fees. Over $110,000, and defendant pays for plantiff’s fees.

Whatever the case, the ensuing fee litigation would seem to have the potential to overwhelm the actual litigated issue.

Except the advice may well not have been negligent. Competent attorneys discuss the likelihood of prevailing, and that likelihood may be very good given the witnesses, evidence and current state of the law. However, a jury sometimes does not accept objectively credible evidence, or accepts objectively unlikely evidence, and the law changes over the course of litigation. A client has to decide whether he wants to proceed given the ever present risk that he will lose, and it is knowledge of that risk that may deter those with some assets from taking legal action or presenting a vigorous defense.