Alternative Fees

Clients require creative, flexible, and predictable approaches to the delivery and pricing of legal services. Anderson, McPharlin & Conners LLP works closely with our clients to develop budgeting and pricing models that deliver focused legal services that are effective, efficient, and most valuable to our clients.

While the standard hourly rate arrangement is most commonly used, when appropriate we collaborate with our clients to develop customized alternative fee arrangements. Such arrangements can provide greater predictability in budgeting for legal costs, and promote risk sharing.

If implemented successfully, alternative fee arrangements provide substantial value and are mutually beneficial for the firm and the client. To ensure alternative fee arrangements are successful, at the initiation of a new engagement, we will invest significant time and effort to better understand the client’s ultimate objectives and preferred approach and legal strategy, as well as agree on the scope and parameters of the project. Because details of the matter are disclosed and discussed at the outset, the resulting fee arrangements typically provide the optimal balance between risk and reward for both parties.

Anderson, McPharlin & Conners LLP prides itself on its ingenuity and creativity in developing alternative fee arrangements that allow us to provide our clients with the most value for a particular matter.

Examples of  alternative fee plans that might be appropriate for a particular case include the following:

Blended Hourly Rates – The firm bills the same hourly rate for all lawyers who work on a client’s matters, regardless of each lawyer’s level or individual billing rate. The blended rate is determined on the basis of work we expect to be provided for a matter and the billing rates of those lawyers we anticipate will work on the matter.

Volume Discounts – Where a client prefers traditional hourly rates, the firm provides an hourly rate discount on a sliding scale in return for the client’s guarantee of a set level or volume of legal work.

Risk-Sharing Options

Pure Contingency Fee — The firm receives a fixed or scaled percentage of any recoveries in a lawsuit brought on behalf of the client as a plaintiff.  The client typically pays the expenses of the litigation.  Pure contingency fees can be useful structures in many plaintiff cases seeking monetary or monetizable damages.  Such arrangements are sometimes favorable when the client is an individual, a startup, a corporation with limited resources to finance its litigation, or an entity desiring strict budget certainty or risk-sharing with its business partners.

Partial Contingency Fee — The firm receives a portion of its hourly rate plus a smaller percentage of any recoveries in the lawsuit.  Partial contingency fees reduce the cost of litigation to the client and are sometimes favorable when the client seeks monetary or monetizable damages.  Additionally, this arrangement can be used when the client is a defendant and both client and the firm wish to make the firm’s compensation partially contingent on agreed upon results or milestones being achieved.

Fixed Fee — The firm agrees to handle a matter or group of matters for a sum certain or for a certain rate of investment per month.  Fixed fees can be made subject to an overall cap paid up front, or they can be for a fixed amount per month without a cap.  The specific nature of any fixed fee arrangement can be tailored to the nature of any given matter.  Clients who desire budgeting certainty often find fixed fee arrangements attractive.

Holdback/Success Fee — The firm is paid a portion of its fees up front, but has a portion withheld contingent upon success in the matter.  If the matter is concluded successfully, Anderson, McPharlin & Conners LLP receives a multiple of the holdback or an agreed upon success fee.  This structure is often used in defense cases or when the result sought in the matter is not monetary.  The firm has used this type of arrangement in cases in which the result sought is summary judgment or limiting damages below a certain quantum.

Appeals — Appellate matters can also be well suited to alternative fee arrangements. The firm may handle appellate work where its compensation rests, in whole or in part, on the success of the appeal.

Other Matters — The examples provided above are not meant to be exhaustive.  Anderson, McPharlin & Conners LLP is willing to discuss any alternative fee arrangement structure for all different types of matters with clients.