Case Studies

3-1 Some of the social benefits associated with contingency fees are that the people who bring the case may not have the money to have representation at start of the trial, but they will have at the end. Another benefit is that if you lose the case all together you will not have to repay any of the lawyer's fees. Some of the costs of the contingency-fee system is that depending on the settlement amount, a person that was injured may not get back as much as expected, and still has to worry about paying the fee. This would especially come into play if the person cannot work again. I am in favor of the contingency fee because it lets people that may not have the money for a lawyer at the start of the case still have a trial.

3-3 A reason that work product should not be available to the opposing attorney is because this is what makes or breaks the case. The information is thought, not fact, and if the opposing lawyer is effective then they too should be able to come up with a persuading work product to convince the judge and jury.

3-4 The appellate court should allow for an appeal. This is because the juror and judge had a personal connection and the juror did not come out with that connection during voir dire. Many times the judge is an active participant in this process and he should have known not to pick someone that he knows personally. With this connection they could have talked about the case outside of the courtroom.