|SAME AS||SAME AS S06803|
|Amd §474-a, rpld subs 3, 4 & 5, Judy L|
|Relates to the maximum allowable amount of contingency fees in medical, dental and podiatric malpractice actions and repeals certain provisions of law relating thereto.|
Go to top
NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF LEGISLATION
submitted in accordance with Assembly Rule III, Sec 1(f)
BILL NUMBER: A8521 SPONSOR: Weinstein
TITLE OF BILL: An act to amend the judiciary law, in relation to the maximum allowable amount of contingency fees in medical, dental and podiatric malpractice actions; and to repeal certain provisions of such law relating thereto   PURPOSE OF BILL: To repeal Section 474-a of the Judiciary Law relating to contingent fees in medical, dental or podiatric negligence cases.   JUSTIFICATION: Since this statute was passed, experience has shown that the sliding scale fee schedule works to the detriment of the injured citizen. It creates an inherent conflict between the interest of the injured patient and the attorney that has agreed to take on the task of proving the case. An example would be as follows: An attorney believes a case may well bring a verdict of at least 1.5 million dollars. He or she is offered five hundred thousand dollars. Below is the application of the fee formula set forth in the existing Section 474-a: 30% of the 1st $250,000 = $75,000 25% of the 2nd $250,000 = $62,500 20% of next $500,000 = $100,000 15% of next $250,000 = $37,000 10% of the balance ($250,000) = $25,000 It can be seen that the fee schedule encourages lawyers to recommend their client settle rather than go to trial. This exact rationale is set forth in the Governor's Program Bill Memorandum in Support, and reads as follows: "By permitting attorneys to recover 30% of smaller awards and a declining percentage thereafter, attorneys would be encouraged to accept reasonable settlements that protect the plaintiffs interest." This statement exhibits a total misunderstanding of an attorney/ client relationship. It is the client who accepts a settlement, not the lawyer. If the purpose of the bill was "to encourage lawyers" by pitting them against the interests of their own clients, then such bill may have been successful, but its intent and result are volitive of Ethical Consider- ation 5-1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, which provides that "The professional judgment of a lawyer should be exercised, within the bounds of the law, solely for the benefit of his client and free of compromising influences and loyalties. Neither his personal interest, the interests of other clients, nor the desires of third persons should be permitted to dilute his loyalty to his client". Ethical Consideration 5-2 provides, in part, that a lawyer should not accept a case if there is a reasonable probability that his personal interest will adversely affect the advice given the client. That same consideration maintains that a lawyer should not assume a position which would tend to make his judgment less protective of his client's inter- ests. For these reasons, Section 474-a of the Judiciary Law should be repealed. Same would be accomplished herein pursuant by phasing out the sliding scale fee schedule set forth in said section such that by Janu- ary 1, 2021, same would be completely repealed.   LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: New Bill, but similar to 1999-2000 A.8762 (Rules)Vetoed. Memo. 47.   FISCAL IMPLICATIONS FOR STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: None.   EFFECTIVE DATE: Immediately, but full repeal of Judiciary Law Sec. 474-a would not be effective until January 1, 2021.
Go to top
STATE OF NEW YORK ________________________________________________________________________ 8521 2017-2018 Regular Sessions IN ASSEMBLY June 18, 2017 ___________ Introduced by M. of A. WEINSTEIN -- read once and referred to the Committee on Judiciary AN ACT to amend the judiciary law, in relation to the maximum allowable amount of contingency fees in medical, dental and podiatric malprac- tice actions; and to repeal certain provisions of such law relating thereto The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assem- bly, do enact as follows: 1 Section 1. Subdivision 2 of section 474-a of the judiciary law, as 2 amended by chapter 485 of the laws of 1986, is amended to read as 3 follows: 4 2. Notwithstanding any inconsistent judicial rule, a contingent fee in 5 a medical, dental or podiatric malpractice action shall not exceed the 6 amount of compensation provided for in the following schedule for cases 7 decided prior to December thirty-first, two thousand eighteen: 8 30 percent of the first [ $250,000] $500,000 of the sum 9 recovered; 10 [ 25 percent of the next $250,000 of the sum recovered;11 20] 25 percent of the next $500,000 of the sum recovered; 12 [ 15] 20 percent of the next $250,000 of the sum 13 recovered; 14 [ 10] 15 percent of any amount over $1,250,000 of the sum 15 recovered; 16 and notwithstanding any inconsistent judicial rule, a contingent fee in 17 a medical, dental or podiatric malpractice action shall not exceed the 18 amount of compensation provided for in the following schedule for cases 19 decided from January first, two thousand nineteen through December thir- 20 ty-first, two thousand nineteen: EXPLANATION--Matter in italics (underscored) is new; matter in brackets [ ] is old law to be omitted. LBD13270-02-7A. 8521 2 1 30 percent of the first $1,000,000 of the sum recovered; 2 25 percent of the next $250,000 of the sum recovered; 3 20 percent of any amount over $1,250,000 of the sum recovered; 4 and notwithstanding any inconsistent judicial rule, a contingent fee in 5 a medical, dental or podiatric malpractice action shall not exceed the 6 amount of compensation provided for in the following schedule for cases 7 decided from January first, two thousand twenty through December thir- 8 ty-first, two thousand twenty: 9 30 percent of the first $1,250,000 of the sum recovered; 10 25 percent of any amount over $1,250,000 of the sum recovered; 11 and after December thirty-first, two thousand twenty, contingency fees 12 in medical, dental and podiatric malpractice actions shall be governed 13 by the rules applicable to all other personal injury and wrongful death 14 actions. 15 § 2. Subdivisions 3, 4 and 5 of section 474-a of the judiciary law are 16 REPEALED. 17 § 3. This act shall take effect immediately; provided, however, that 18 section two of this act shall take effect January 1, 2021.