Do Your Contract or Settlement Negotiations Amount to Fraud?

IMG_1215Your initial response to the title question should certainly be ‘No’. In light of a recent case pending in the U.S. Court of Appeals, however, you may want to reevaluate your representations made in contract or settlement negotiations. A bank VP was convicted of fraud based on representations he made in a deal he made with his bank employer, even when the bank acknowledged and waived the obvious conflict of interest. Makes me think any amount of ‘puffing’ in contract or settlement negotiations could turn to a fraud indictment.

Set Up

Let me set up the facts. Be patient, the complex setup is worth the payoff pitch:

In the U.S. v. Weimert case, Weimert was convicted of wire fraud in a negotiated transaction. Weimert was a bank senior vice president and president of a bank subsidiary, IDI. IDI was a 50% minority owner in CCLP, LLC. The majority owner of CCLP, Burkes, held a right of first refusal on IDI’s shares in CCLP. As the real estate market was crashing in 2008, the bank accepted Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) funds from the US government.

In order to gain liquidity and avoid bankruptcy, the bank told Weimert to sell assets to make interest payments. Weimert found a legitimate buyer, Kalka, to make a ‘stalking horse’ offer on the CCLP shares held by IDI. Kalka’s letter of intent included a provision that gave Weimert, personally, a commission on the deal and a buy-in interest of 4 7/8%  in CCLP. Weimert took that LOI to Burkes, as he was required to do, and convinced Burkes to match the offer. Burkes matched it (almost, but that’s not an issue in the case).

Weimert then took Burkes’ offer to the bank board of directors. Weimert represented to the board that the buyer would not purchase the asset unless Weimert received the commission and the stake in CCLP. This was factually not true; the buyer made no such requirements to consummate the deal. Weimert’s conflict of interest was acknowledged and signed off by the bank’s attorneys. The bank waived the conflict and approved the sale but was ignorant of Weimert’s misrepresentation about the buyer’s alleged stipulation that he obtain a commission and interest in CCLP.

TARP inspectors investigated the transaction and brought wire fraud claims against Weimert since his negotiations on the deal were communicated across state lines. A jury convicted him on 5 of 6 fraud counts. The jury found that Weimert defrauded the bank by inserting himself in the transaction based on the misrepresentation that the buyer would only buy the CCLP shares if he obtained a commission and interest in it.

Weimert’s case is now on appeal. At oral argument, the judges raised issues of prosecutorial judgment and whether this claim should have ever been brought.

One judge commented: “I’m very troubled by the application of federal wire fraud to statements about parties’ negotiating positions. That is, what terms are important in this deal to whom.” He also noted, “I have not found any case law treating those sorts of representations by anybody under any circumstances as material for purposes of federal fraud statutes.”

Apparently, the judge questioned whether Weimert’s representations about the deal were anything but ‘puffing’ or negotiation tactics. This position appears to make the assumption that the bank could no longer rely on Weimert’s impartiality when it waived the known conflict that Weimert was now personally interested in the deal and whether the reason for his personal interest was because the buyer required it or because he wanted a slice of the pie does not give rise to a claim under the wire fraud statutes.

He’s bluffing, sure. This happens in deals. These are capitalist acts among consenting adults.

The same judge then questioned the prosecutor about his concern that this was just negotiation rhetoric and not fraud. The prosecutor countered with an argument that there was a conflict of interest. The judge responded that “[Weimert] has disclosed the conflict of interest. It is out there for everybody to see. The board brings in its lawyer and says, in essence, eyes wide open. We need to do this deal.” The judge clarified: “Let me be very frank about what concerns me about this … it seems to me that … this case comes very close to making negotiations subject to federal criminal prosecutions at the discretion of the U.S. attorney and the grand jury.”

The judge drilled down on what makes this case fraud when other deal negotiations are dismissed as puffing and rhetoric. The prosecutor responded that this case is different because Weimert “induce[d] [the board] to waive the conflict of interest by misrepresentation” and “inserted [him]self in the deal” by representing to the board that Burkes required it. The judge’s response: “He’s bluffing, sure. This happens in deals. These are capitalist acts among consenting adults” and commented that “[t]his case seems to me to break very new ground.”

If you are really interested, you can search the Seventh Circuit’s oral arguments here.

The Take-Away

Negotiating is an art. Parties constantly make representations based on their position and outcome goals. There are fine lines between ‘puffing’ and fraud. Weimert crossed over. Let me see if I can help clarify some of the gray areas.

In negotiations, you will find yourself in differing situations. For example, Weimert was in a position of trust as an employee and senior vice president. Even though his personal interest was disclosed to his employer, the bank, he was not free to lie about the essential facts underlying the transaction. He was still the only person reporting or presenting the deal to the board. Certainly there is still some ‘shame on you’ to be shared with the board. Under the circumstances, if the board had any concerns, it should have assigned another employee to oversee the transaction since Weimert was clearly conflicted.

You need to examine your position in the deal. Do you owe any duty to the other side in the deal? Are you related by blood, employment, or contract? Is the other party relying on your opinion, investigation, or valuation that is not otherwise disclaimed in the written agreement? Are you in a position of trust in relation to the other party? Do you exert control over the other party?

Likewise, the amount of scrutiny a deal will receive is a function of the amount at stake and the parties involved. The bigger the numbers, the more scrutiny, usually. If government funds are involved, such as the TARP funds involved in Weimert, you can expect a certain amount of additional oversight. The IRS also likes to look at big deals to make sure they get their cut. If you are crafting a deal to avoid taxes and your express negotiations are key to entitlement to a preferred tax treatment, be careful. Likewise for family transactions. You may find a sweet deal from your elderly uncle but you have to know that your cousins and siblings are going to look at it very closely and blame you if it goes south or you took advantage. Also, with elderly people, you need to make sure that competency is not an issue. Appearance of fraud is sometimes as powerful as actual fraud. Think about how it would look in front of a jury. Put it in writing and disclose anything you think might make a difference to someone in an armchair quarterback role a year from now.

Another note: you should not rely on your attorney to sanitize your misrepresentations. Attorneys are your agent and you are bound by what they say or agree to on your behalf. Also, take a look at the lawyer rules about representations:

Rule 4.1 of the Utah Rules of Professional Conduct provides:
In the course of representing a client a lawyer shall
not knowingly:
(a) Make a false statement of material fact or
law to a third person; or
(b) Fail to disclose a material fact, when disclosure
is necessary to avoid assisting a criminal or
fraudulent act by a client, unless disclosure is
prohibited by Rule 1.6.

The comments to this rule help clarify some of the question about representations in negotiations:

Whether a particular statement should be regarded as one of fact can depend on the circumstances. Under generally accepted conventions in negotiation, certain types of statements ordinarily are not taken as statements of material fact. Estimates of price or value placed on the subject of a transaction and a party’s intentions as to an acceptable settlement of a claim are ordinarily in this category

(Emphasis added). My partner, Keith Call, recently addressed the subject in the Utah Bar Journal article “Is it Ethical to Be Dishonest in Negotiations?” (see page 40). His article is addressed specifically to lawyers but you may find it interesting.

There are issues and nuances for negotiations that certainly cannot all be addressed here. If you have questions, you should get specific legal advice. If you would like more information about negotiations or how to stay out of trouble, contact me, Utah attorney Ken Reich directly. I have represented both companies and individuals in numerous business matters and disputes since 1999. Using my many years of experience and backed by a firm of legal specialists in nearly every legal field, I can help you evaluate your situation and help you make smart decisions about your business and your life that will best fit your circumstances.

When Your Employee Manual May Hurt More than It Helps- a Fresh Utah Example

IMG_4161You have carefully crafted your employee handbook to expressly and explicitly disclaim any contractual relationship with your employees and keep them at-will and then- BOOM. You got cute with the fine print. You kept your important language buried in the minutia of the handbook while keeping all the employee-friendly terms front and center. This may have been good enough in the past but it is no longer. Let’s look at Reynolds v. Gentry Finance Corporation, 2016 UT App 35, a recent case from the Utah Court of Appeals on this issue.

“[A]n employee handbook distributed to an at-will employee may modify the at-will employment relationship.”

A company’s employee manual is a great opportunity to define its employment relationship with its employees. In fact, employers often expect and hope that employees refer to the employment manual to understand the terms of their employment– not every employee warrants an employment agreement. Here’s where the Gentry company went a bit awry.

Gentry wanted to keep the bundle of at-will employee ‘privileges’ intact while at the same time make the broad statement that “NO EMPLOYEE WILL BE TERMINATED OR HAVE ANY ADVERSE ACTION TAKEN AGAINST THEM FOR BRINGING A COMPLAINT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE HOME OFFICE.” (Capitalization, boldface, and italics in Gentry’s handbook).

“Utah law allows employers to disclaim any contractual relationship that might otherwise arise from employee manuals.” To do this, however, the employer must include in the employee handbook “a clear and conspicuous disclaimer of contractual liability.” This is where it gets sticky and you need to step carefully because 1) “[t]he prominence of the text, [2)]the placement of the disclaimer, and [3)] the language of the disclaimer are all relevant factors in determining whether a disclaimer is clear and conspicuous.”

What does this mean? Well, for example, in a Utah Supreme Court case, a disclaimer that was conspicuously located at the top of a employee handbook and prominently bolded and SET APART by a text box was good enough or “sufficiently prominent” to put employees on notice of its terms. Use your imagination. Look at the ALLCAPS, italicized, and bolded statement from Gentry’s handbook. It stands out. And, if it stands out to you, it is likely to stand out to your employees. If you have questions, talk to a lawyer. I’m getting ahead of myself. Let’s get back to Gentry.

Gentry got sideways with its employee handbook even though it had four separate disclaimers in it. Unlike the disclaimer case example above and Gentry’s statement that an employee would not be terminated or had adverse action taken against them, Gentry’s disclaimer was nearly invisible. The court found that the disclaimer had not been placed at the top of the relevant policy, was “not prominent, not bolded, and not set apart by a text box. It [was], in a word, inconspicuous.”

So what? Well, for Gentry it meant that its employee could avoid having its case dismissed and a jury would get to hear her case. Juries are a mixed bag. If your employee handbook is clean and clear and meets all the right requirements to keep your at-will rights intact, you punch your ticket out of the case early and cheaply. Gentry, however, now gets to pitch its story to a jury who may be sympathetic to an employee that the jury may feel has been wronged.

The takeaway from Reynolds: don’t get cute with your employee manual. Don’t put the important stuff in the fine print or make it inconspicuous. Bold it. Put it in ALLCAPS and italicize it. Make it a black box label that cannot be ignored.

There are issues and nuances for employee handbooks that certainly cannot all be addressed here. If you have questions, you should get specific legal advice. If you would like more information about employee manuals, employment agreements, protecting your rights, or rectifying wrongs committed against you, contact Utah attorney Ken Reich directly. Mr. Reich has represented both companies and individuals in business matters and disputes. Using his many years of experience and backed by a firm of legal specialists in nearly every legal field, Mr. Reich can help you evaluate your situation and help you make smart decisions about your business and your life that will best fit your circumstances.

Commercial Damages You Cannot Afford to Not Pursue: the Contingency Fee Solution – Part III

This is Part III of a three part series on business or commercial contingency fee cases. See Part I and Part II.

Killer day at Brighton Resort.

You may have a claim for damages that you may not be able to afford to pursue. Damages run the gamut from personal injury to lost profits, lost income, loss of business opportunities, defamation, or losses related to trademarks, patents, or copyrights. A contingency fee can be a good option to pursue your claim.

In Part I, I discussed the benefits of pursuing your case on a contingency fee basis. In Part II, I discussed how an attorney evaluates your potential claim. In this third installment on contingency fee claims, I discuss what you need to know when negotiating with an attorney once the attorney agrees to take your case.

Your claim is an asset with an uncertain value. It may have substantial value or no value (that’s what your attorney needs to determine- see Part II), but once you know it has some value, the negotiations begin. Remember, if one attorney has evaluated your claim and believes you have a claim worth pursuing, it is very likely that there is another, equally competent attorney willing to pursue your claim. Feel free to shop around. You are not committed to one attorney until you sign a contingency fee agreement with him/her.


When you hire an attorney, there should always be a written agreement establishing what the attorney will do for you and how you will pay for it. Some attorneys are good about explaining everything and walking you through the terms of the agreement. Others have their secretary send you the fee agreement with very little discussion. Although we all agree to contracts every day without understanding all the fine print (Facebook games anyone?), do not accept a contingency fee agreement without understanding it thoroughly.

Your claim is an asset that you are inviting lawyers to share in the risk of pursuing. You will be negotiating the terms of that joint risk and potential reward with your attorney. The attorney does not obtain a legal ownership interest in your claim (that would be illegal) but structures a deal where the attorney only gets paid fees if you recover. The structure of this financial agreement will be established in a written contingency fee agreement. (NOTE: if your attorney does not put this in writing, a red flag should go up– by law, it’s always in writing). Feel free to use your imagination in structuring your deal. Nothing ventured, nothing gained. If you do not ask, you will not receive.

When entering into a contingency fee agreement, Utah attorneys are bound by the Utah Rules of Professional Conduct. These rules limit and shape the agreement between a client and attorney. Under these rules and good practice, the basic terms of any contingency fee agreement with attorneys should discuss the following:

1. Scope of engagement- client, matter, and limits: Attorneys want to define exactly what legal services they are providing to you. In a contingency fee matter, your attorney will typically only represent you regarding the piece of litigation that will lead to a recovery (hopefully a big one). If you want your contingency fee attorney to do more, like work on tax implications of your recovery (or loss), estate planning, or that nasty neighbor threatening you about the condition of your fence, plan on either including those issues in your contingency fee letter or paying extra later on. A well-written contingency fee agreement should spell out the bounds of what the attorney will do for you.

2. Fees: You already know that your attorney’s fee will get paid out of the recovery (if any). The amount of that fee is negotiable: it is whatever you agree it is- there is no set formula.

Typically, a contingency fee starts at 33% and goes up from there. You and your attorney could agree to a lower fee if the attorney settles your case very early with very little effort. You should also expect that the fee will likely increase if it takes longer or more effort to obtain the recovery.

Often the fee percentage is tied to identifiable landmarks in the case such as the filing of a complaint, the close of fact or expert discovery, the first day of trial, the issuance of a verdict, appeals following trial, or collection of a judgment. You and your attorney can decide which landmark is used (if any) to trigger a higher or lower contingency fee.

Where appropriate, you may be asked to set a fee ‘ceiling’ or a fee ‘floor’ regardless of recovery. For example, if your best case potential recovery is $100,000, it may be appropriate to agree to a set fee for any recovery greater than $50,000. The economics of the case may not justify an attorney taking the case unless such a greater fee was assured. In other words, you may not be able to entice any attorney to take your case unless the recovery was big enough to justify the risk.  A fee ceiling might be appropriate if your case has a substantial value with little downside risk. Also, it could be a convertible ceiling, meaning that if the case drags on for too long, becomes more expensive due to unforeseen issues, or actually has to be tried to verdict, the ceiling may be removed.

3. Costs: In a contingency fee case, you will typically only pay costs if your case produces a recovery. Costs of litigation most often include court filing fees, copy costs, subpoena costs charged by others, expert witness fees, trial exhibits, legal research, courier fees, and travel costs. You will find that typically the largest costs are the expert witnesses. Your agreement should specifically define exactly which costs are recoverable so there is no question later on.

Also, your out-of-pocket costs are not reimbursed by the attorney unless agreed to. If you are asked to make copies, travel to a deposition, or take time off work for matters involving the case (trial, hearings, etc.), your costs will not be covered. You will be expected to have your costs reimbursed from the recovery.

Attorneys like to know that you are committed to the case and will often ask you to invest some of your cash to go towards costs. Note that costs do not include attorney fees or any fees or costs normally attributable to any of the attorney’s overhead or staff.

4. Calculation: Assuming you win, recovery is often divided in the following order:

  1. Attorney recovery of fees: Gross recovery X contingency fee percentage = attorney fees.
  2. Recovery of costs (attorney or client) is then subtracted from the amount remaining after the recovery of attorney fees (gross recovery – attorney fees).
  3. Everything left after paying attorney fees and costs is yours (after payment of medical liens, if any).

Some will deduct the costs before calculating fees. Know what you agree to; it makes a difference. For example: Assume 33% fees and $10,000 costs for $100,000 recovery. Costs calculated as above: $100,000 X 33% = $33,000 fees; $67,000 – $10,000 = $57,000 recovery to client. Costs calculated before fees: $100,000 – $10,000 = $90,000; $90,000 X 33% = $29,700 fees; $90,000 – $29,700 = $60,300. It’s a $3,300 swing.

5. Withdrawal/Dismissal: This part of the agreement lets you fire your attorney or your attorney to withdraw from representing you. Neither situation is without consequence. Typically, even after you fire your attorney or s/he withdraws, the agreement will allow the attorney to retain an interest in your case and be paid a certain percentage if you ever recover anything.

6. Retainer: Although this is normally a requirement when hiring an attorney, you should not be asked to provide a retainer in a contingency fee case unless it is a retainer for costs (see above). If you are asked to pay a fee retainer, find another attorney since it should be clear that they do not know what a contingency fee case is.

Negotiating a contract, including a contingency fee contract, is a creative endeavor. Even if your case is a run-of-the-mill personal injury claim (dog-bite, car accident, etc.), you should have room to get creative in your deal. And, because this is a creative process, there are questions you may have that I have not addressed. Below, I have attempted to make a FAQ (frequently asked questions) section to hopefully address some of your questions. If you still have questions, please feel free to ask in the comments or contact me directly.


  • In a personal injury case, who pays medical liens? You do. In a case involving medical liens, your attorney is legally obligated to pay for such liens out of the recovery after the attorney fees and costs are deducted. In many cases, your attorney should be able to negotiate lower rates with insurers and Medicare/Medicaid based on a number of factors including the cost of recovery (attorney fees and costs) and whether the expenses are related to the claim or something else.
  • Will you and/or your attorney advance costs? Depending on your ability to invest and the claims and anticipated costs, an attorney will often require you to put some skin in the game and invest cash towards costs. You may not have any money to invest so it may cost you in other areas such as percentage of recovery.
  • If your attorney advances costs, will the recovery of advanced costs be contingent? This is a variation of who is advancing the costs. If a lawyer advances costs, it typically does so at his/her risk.
  • Will the party advancing costs be entitled to interest on such costs? Usually, yes.
  • Will costs come out of the total recovery before the fees are calculated or after? The attorney will want his/her fee recovery based on the gross recovery, however, this decreases your overall recovery. It’s a numbers issue. Typically, costs come out after fees but it’s negotiable.
  • Will you have to pay for your opponent’s attorney fees if you lose? Depends. The loser only pays attorney fees in Utah if provided for by contract, statute, or some exception. Your case may not involve an attorney fee clause or statute. If it does and you lose, then, yes, you will be responsible for an attorney fee judgment. Note that if you are entitled to attorney fees if you win, then your opponent is typically entitled to have you pay fees if you lose– even if the contract or statute does not explicitly say so.
  • If your recovery includes an award for attorney fees, how is that award divided at the conclusion of the matter? Depends. If it has not been addressed in your contingency fee agreement, then it is considered part of the recovery and is subject to the percentage of recovery. There may be tweaks to this outcome. It’s best to discuss this on the front end instead of fight about it later.
  • Will attorney’s percentage increase with trial, appeal, retrial, or substantial collection efforts? Typically, yes. Attorneys will often demand a higher percentage of recovery at each stage of litigation in order to cover the increased work and risk involved.
  • Will you be required to reasonably cooperate with your attorneys? Yes. It’s in your best interest and you will be under a duty to do so.
  • Will you have any ability to approve or disapprove of a settlement? Yes. Typically, both you and your attorney agree to the settlement. You may give your attorney advance approval to settle within a certain range.
  • Will your attorneys be able to withdraw from the representation? Yes, and so will you. That does not mean, however, that if you later obtain an award in the case (usually with other attorneys) the attorney may not retain some ability to collect the costs and fees it expended in the case while acting as your attorney. Your agreement should spell out the parties’ rights so there is not another lawsuit about any recovery.
  • In the event of a dispute with your attorney, how will that dispute be resolved?
    There is no typical situation. Some attorneys like to keep issues confidential and will insert an arbitration clause in the agreement. Many will require arbitration before the local bar association in order keep it fair and the playing field level. Some attorneys prefer courts and juries. There are risks and benefits of both. You should understand that the attorney-client privilege is typically waived in such a dispute and whatever you told your attorney will be fair game. And, your agreement will likely have an attorney fee provision requiring the loser to pay the fees of the prevailing party.
  • In commercial cases there may be potential for non-monetary compensation paid as part of a favorable settlement. How will these things be valued for purposes of calculating a fee? There is lots of leeway to value a ‘win’ that does not include money. Even if you cannot come up with a value, at least acknowledge the issue in your agreement and establish a way to value it later once the dust settles. For example, if disputed, it can be given to a mutually agreeable third-party to establish the value.
  • Should I get an attorney to help me negotiate with my attorney on the contingency fee agreement? Not likely. If you do not feel comfortable with or are confused by the terms proposed by your chosen attorney, discuss it with the attorney. You should feel comfortable discussing this or any part of your case with your attorney. This is your asset and you are asking the attorney to help you recover it. If after discussing the agreement with your attorney, you still do not feel good about it or do not understand it, feel free to have another attorney look at it and advise you. Your attorney on the contingency fee matter should have no problem with you seeking separate advice. You may find that you want a different attorney to handle your case.

One last note: at the end of your case, win or lose, your attorney owes you a written statement showing the outcome of the matter and, if there is a recovery, showing the remittance to the client and the method of its determination. If you do not get one, demand one. It’s your case and the attorney is along for the ride.

There are issues and nuances that cannot all be addressed here. If you have questions, you should get specific legal advice. When in doubt, go with your gut feeling. If you don’t like the attorney you first talk to, find another– there is always another. Talk to your friends, get referrals from people you trust, read the American Bar Association suggestions, or talk to me.

For more information about your potential contingency fee case or a complementary consultation, contact Utah attorney Ken Reich directly. Mr. Reich routinely represents both companies and individuals in business matters and disputes involving a contingency fee arrangement. Using his many years of experience and backed by a firm of legal specialists in nearly every legal field, Mr. Reich can help you evaluate your claim and help you make smart decisions about your business and your life that will best fit your circumstances.

Commercial Damages You Cannot Afford to Not Pursue: the Contingency Fee Solution – Part II

This is Part II of a three part series on business or commercial contingency fee cases.

20151115_164150You may have a claim for damages that you may not be able to afford to pursue. Damages run the gamut from personal injury to lost profits, lost income, or loss of business opportunities. A contingency fee can be a good option to pursue your claim. In this second installment on contingency fees, I discuss what an attorney needs from you to effectively evaluate your potential claim. In Part I, I discussed the benefits of pursuing your case on a contingency fee basis.


Where the rubber meets the road for an attorney is an evaluation of a number of factors which are, in order of importance:

  • Liability
  • Damages (amount and collectability)
  • Jury appeal
  • Potential defenses, counterclaims, and unsettled points of law

Information is king in this process to get an attorney to agree to take your business or commercial contingency fee case. Provide documents, names of witnesses

Liability is the legal basis for your claim.

Liability is often the most critical area of inquiry. Depending on the claim or ’cause of action,’ the liability analysis is typically an evaluation of duty, breach, and causation (damages is addressed below). Duty can arise from a number of sources: contract, judge-made law (i.e., uncodified common law), statutes, and course of dealing between parties.

Here is a list of the most common types of claims that work well with a contingency fee arrangement:

  • Breach of contract
  • Negligence
  • Breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing
  • Bad faith: insurance claims
  • Business torts: interference with contract, breach of fiduciary duty, partnership liability, join venture liability, privacy, cybersecurity
  • Intellectual property: trademark, patent, copyright
  • Professional liability: legal, accounting, medical, etc.
  • Product liability: strict, negligence, and warranty
  • Premises liability
  • False statements: defamation, slander, and libel
  • Misrepresentation: fraudulent and negligent
  • Employment: ADA, FMLA, FLSA, wage claim, whistleblower, wrongful termination, privacy
  • Civil rights: Section 1983, state and federal laws
  • Personal torts: death, personal injury, emotional distress, battery
  • Miscellaneous: will contests, malicious prosecution, false arrest, abuse of process

Some claims, however, do not work well in a contingency fee arrangement. Typically, such claims are where money is not the result sought. Some such situations include guardianship, criminal and domestic relations (divorce/alimony) cases (it is illegal), regulatory matters, non-litigation matters, and restraining orders.

When you meet with your attorney, tell them everything. Remember, your conversation is confidential and protected. It is critical that the facts that will ultimately be revealed in discovery be revealed to the attorney up front. An attorney cannot evaluate and strategize for facts s/he does not know. I have had clients try to hide or down-play facts in the hope that they can settle the case before the facts are revealed. This seldom works. Moreover, the facts clients are most worried about are often not the facts that are most critical to the case. The best way to deal with worrisome facts is to tell the attorney so that the facts, if truly damaging, can be dealt with appropriately. Otherwise, the facts may come out at the most disadvantageous time or in the worst possible light.

     Duty and Breach

A duty is what you are required to do (by contract, law, etc.) and breach is the failure to meet that duty. The causes of action above all require the person or business causing the harm to meet a duty of some sort. For example, every driver on the road is expected to follow the law. Likewise, every party to a contract is expected to do what they promise to do. When a driver fails to follow the law or a contracting party fails to keep their promise, they have breached their duty.

     Causation ties a breach to a harm.

Causation is often a non-factor when causation is obvious such as a car accident: Car A and Car B collide and the cars were damaged. The issue is not what caused the damage (cars colliding) but who caused the cars to collide (breach of duty). Causation can get particularly complex in terms of lost profits due to harm to a business or lost wages. There are complex market factors that influence lost profits and numerous factors to evaluate. Such a calculation nearly always requires expert testimony from an economist specializing in the business at issue.

Damages and Collectability

It is hard to underestimate damages. This issue is a very close second to liability in terms of importance. If there is no pot at the end of the rainbow or if the pot is empty or missing, there is no reason to chase the rainbow. An attorney will only agree to fund a contingency fee case if the outcome has some way of paying for the attorney’s investment of time, money, and resources. The larger the potential outcome and collectible source (insurance, or solvent company), the more interested an attorney will be to take a risk– even if your case has warts.

Jury Appeal

Does your case have some sexy facts that will interest a jury? Or, is the value of your case so high that a jury will have to sit up and take notice? For instance, does your case involve blatant (i.e., easily proved) fraud or misrepresentation or abuse of position? If your facts make a compelling story at a cocktail party, it probably has some jury appeal. It’s not necessary, but it helps.

Potential Defenses, Counterclaims, and Unsettled Points of Law

Your attorney needs to know the limitations and risks of your claim. In business disputes in particular, there are often counterclaims that can be filed against you and defenses to your claims. You may or may not be able to identify the potential counterclaims and defenses, making it vital that your attorney has all information possible when evaluating your case. Your attorney will also evaluate whether gaps in the law create risks to your claim.

For more information about your potential contingency fee case and for a free consultation, please contact Utah attorney Ken Reich directly. Mr. Reich routinely represents both companies and individuals in business matters and disputes involving a contingency fee arrangement. Using his many years of experience and backed by a firm of legal specialists in nearly every legal field, Mr. Reich can help you evaluate your claim and help you make smart decisions about your business and your life that will best fit your circumstances.

Commercial Damages You Cannot Afford to Not Pursue: the Contingency Fee Solution – Part I

This is Part I of a three part series on commercial contingency fee cases.

Rockstar Asset RecoveryI have had clients come to me with stories about how they have suffered massive damages but cannot afford to pay an attorney to pursue the case. It happens all too often.

For example, when a business is losing money or has a catastrophic loss, there is not often extra money available to pay an attorney to investigate your potential claims. Attorneys are expensive and most often want a hefty retainer up front.

Yet, you potentially have a great case! Someone embezzled, defrauded you, or breached duties they owed to you.

Sometimes, you just know that that someone did something wrong that caused you financial harm– you just don’t know how or what the legal claim is. Attorneys do and paying for it is the problem.

If you find yourself in this situation or the risk of litigation is more than you are willing to bear, there are attorneys willing to take your case on a ‘contingency fee’ basis. This first installment on contingency fees evaluates the reasons why a contingency fee arrangement might be right for you personally or your business.



A ‘contingency fee’ agreement is where your attorney gets paid out of the successful outcome of the case or not at all. The out-of-pocket costs of the litigation are often fronted by the law firm but may be negotiated between the parties. Except in the personal injury arena, most contingency fee agreements are unique and depend on the facts of each case.

Where appropriate, there are good reasons to engage attorneys on a contingency fee basis:

You can pursue claims against the big guys.

Not every business or individual can afford to pay attorneys by the hour. That’s generally how attorneys get paid. Rich opponents can mire your case in court for years with discovery and motions knowing that you will cave once the fees get too high. A contingency fee arrangement allows you to share the costs and risks of litigation with your attorneys and have the case resolved on its merits– not on who has more money.

Your attorney shares your burden.

A contingency fee arrangement aligns your interest and your attorney’s interest. Your interest is in a successful outcome while avoiding spending more money on a potentially losing claim. Your attorney is interested in a successful outcome in order to get paid. Your attorney will be finely tuned to the successful outcome of the case and not just billing hours. You can expect that an attorney will evaluate your claim on a deep level since s/he will be investing in its successful result. When an attorney is paid by the hour, the outcome is important but the method and efficiency of reaching it sometimes gets out of focus. In the right hands, a contingency fee arrangement fosters efficiency and ultimate mutual success.

You control your costs and risk.

Your core capability is not the law. You have a business to run and a life to live. A contingency fee arrangement allows you to use your money to keep your business running and to focus on your core capabilities. An attorney becomes your partner for the purpose of recovering your losses using his/her core capabilities in the law.

In Part II of this series, I let you know how an attorney evaluates your claim.

For more information about your potential contingency fee case or a free consultation, contact Utah attorney Ken Reich directly. Mr. Reich routinely represents both companies and individuals in business matters and disputes involving a contingency fee arrangement. Using his many years of experience and backed by a firm of legal specialists in nearly every legal field, Mr. Reich can help you evaluate your claim and help you make smart decisions about your business and your life that will best fit your circumstances.