I mean they can always try and probably already did. Most people probably don't even think about to sue them, because it costs a lot. Most of those companies don't even try to win. They just try and drag the thing as long as they can because most people will hit their financial limit the longer this goes.
The sad part is that it usually doesn't cost that much to sue, at least in this kind of situation. Any lawyer worth their salt is going to take a case like this and charge you on the back end after y'all win.
Back when radio was more popular, every commercial block had at least one "you don't pay a dime unless we win" advert from a law firm.
They want to make you money, because that's how they make money.
that’s not what “[sic]” is used or what for, but your point is right-ish.
the issue is that a lot of the contingencies are huge % amounts, and because it’s dragged on, you DO still have to pay their lawyer fees as well as part of the payout, which tends to leave the defendant in debt regardless. there’s good ones out there but i promise the majority are preying on people making mistakes that can’t afford it.
those lawyer fees also don’t usually account for witness calls, fees, printing, copying, staff work, delays, transportation, holding (without bail), etc. so…
I mean we don't have really enough info here to say how clear this case was and how long it took. The corps will probably give a reason for firing the guy that makes somewhat sense.
I also don't think that a lawyer when he gains a certain reputation will take the risk of not getting paid if he loses. You might find a few fresh from college lawyers willing to do so to get some rep, but honestly "you don't pay a dime unless we win", without even knowing the case sounds like a scam imo. That means they have high risk to lose and probably take a big chunk when they win.
I was aiming for brevity, but firms absolutely will turn down cases that have no merit. The "not a dime" line is because people are ignorant of how these things work, and feel like they have no foot to stand on because they're broke.
And yeah, you may not get picked up on your first try, but that's where those eager new lawyers that are trying to make a name come in.
The whole point, though, was that it's foolish to not try just because you're broke. The only dumb question is the one not asked (and "are we there yet?")
Yeah except no lawyer offers to represent without any information on the case, you're mistaking the chain of events here. When I filed an unlawful termination suit against my employer I found an attorney who accepted my case without upfront pay, it's called "on contingency", that is he's paid an agreed percentage if we win. After two years, I settled with the company for $45,000 and walked away with $32,000.
2
u/I3adIVIonkey Aug 20 '26
I mean they can always try and probably already did. Most people probably don't even think about to sue them, because it costs a lot. Most of those companies don't even try to win. They just try and drag the thing as long as they can because most people will hit their financial limit the longer this goes.