contingent legal fee agreement pursuant to Judiciary Law § 474-

a(2)1 .

          On October 11, 1994, plaintiffs, individually and as co-

administrators of Seth Speken’s estate (hereinafter the "Estate"),

commenced this action against defendants. The complaint contains

two causes of action. One was for pain and suffering and the

other was for wrongful death. Plaintiffs allege that the Hospital

failed to properly treat Seth Speken’s condition during the period

August 21, 1993 to August 27, 1993, and that this departure from

appropriate medical standards proximately caused Seth Speken’s

death (Complaint, ¶ 13).

          On October 12, 1994, Moore engaged Frank as trial counsel to

prosecute this action on behalf of plaintiffs. Pursuant to a

written agreement, Moore agreed to pay Frank 2/3 of the contingent

fee. A notice of Frank’s retainer was filed with the Judicial Conference,

indicating that Frank was to receive the standard statutory fee, and

that Moore, as attorney of
record, was to receive a fee "equal to the

same percentage of  attorneys’ fee that the attorneys’ fee bears to the

total recovery"


                     1 Judiciary Law § 474-a(2) establishes a mandatory fee
                        schedule for attorneys who are retained to prosecute
                        medical malpractice claims on a contingent fee basis.
                        The schedule limits attorney’s fees by applying the
                        following correlations: 30% of the first $250,000 of
                        the sum recovered; 25% of the next $250,000 of the
                        sum recovered; 20% of the next $500,000 of the sum
                        recovered; 15% of the next $250,000 of the sum
                        the sum recovered.

Click for Previous Page

Click for Next Page (4/29)

Click for Preface