Will he never go away (nassar trigger warning)

[Doug1233]

There is typically a pool of money available to the plaintiffs and its divided based on various factors.

Yep found it. Schedule H. Each abuse victim gets interviewed and is awarded points based on a number of criteria like “flashbacks” and “substance abuse” and “lack of employment” etc etc.

 

[JaJa]

Yes please. I don’t really care how much each victim gets. They all deserve more, regardless. I’m much more interested in how much Manly will get his hands on (and how badly he will try to bury it).

Look, he is going to get a substantial fee. And frankly he earned it. He just did. I am no great fan of John Manly but lawyers do not work for free. Also, just as an aside, apart from the current plaintiffs the settlement will take future claimants into account.

 

[onodian]

I already went to confession and am on my 23rd Hail Mary. So I guess your absolution means i can stop now.

 

[Doug1233]

Look, he is going to get a substantial fee. And frankly he earned it. He just did. I am no great fan of John Manly but lawyers do not work for free. Also, just as an aside, apart from the current plaintiffs the settlement will take future claimants into account.

I’ve worked for a whole two years on a deal, pulling all nighters and 90 hour weeks, and my firm never saw anything CLOSE to 30 million for the work.

I’m not saying he should work for free. But 32 million? Even the hugest deals that we have done, we have never billed more than 4 or 5 mil on one matter.

At 1000USD an hour, you’d need to bill 32,000 hours to hit 32M. That’s ten senior partner-level attorneys, devoting 2 whole years each of solid work, all to this one file.

I know that’s a gross simplification. But I just can’t see how Manly’s firm alone could be awarded that level of a fee. I doubt all his attorneys are billing a grand each an hour. Most juniors and mid levels only bill half that, max.

 

[JaJa]

Look, Manly is in a class of plaintiffs’ lawyers with very few others. Most plaintiffs’ attorneys are barely getting by. But guys like Manly earn more than even the top partners at major corporate firms.

It’s just what it is.

Out of curiosity – what do the partners at your (former I gather) firm bill at?

 

[Doug1233]

Partners bill between 875 and about 1200 (only the tax ones bill at 1200).

Associates between about 400-700.

Paralegals like, 80-200.

It just seems like a cash cow that they’re milking like fuck. And it doesn’t sit well with how they’re arguing the other side.

I guess at the end of the day the only losers are the insurance companies. So I’m not too fussed either way. It just seems a bit hypocritical. I’m
Not saying he should work for free. But there’s a huge difference between 15-20M and 32M.

 

[JaJa]

I doubt all his attorneys are billing a grand each an hour.

Manly doesn’t work on a hourly rate. Its all contingency fee stuff. B Court settlements are an exception.

 

[Doug1233]

I bet Manly doesn’t have to sit and interview before a panel and justify his “ work points” like all the victims are going to have to, very painfully, under schedule H.

 

[JaJa]

Honestly I have no real problem with it. Contingency fee lawyers take a huge risk. As I said most are barely earning a living. Manly managed to become extremely successful and get to the top of his game. He earned it – did not happen by magic.

Its not different from hourly rates in the sense that there is a huge discrepancy between what partners at different firms can bill at. $1,000.00 is pretty modest by some standards in NY these days.

 

[Doug1233]

Yes but wouldn’t he have also “earned it” if he had 20M?

My gripe isn’t with the fact he got a large fee. It’s with the quantum.

He was never gonna lose this case.

 

[Denn]

Look, he is going to get a substantial fee. And frankly he earned it. He just did. I am no great fan of John Manly but lawyers do not work for free.

I do feel that $38 million is more than a “substantial fee”, though.

I know you weren’t making such a claim yourself, but related to what you said, it always irritates me when various people use the argument “I don’t not work for free” as a justification for an absurd payment. That feeling turns to anger when it’s something like a class action suit where there are actual victims.

ETA: I honestly can’t judge what a reasonable fee would be… Also, there could be numerous lawyers involved, so that is a consideration.

 

[rlayt]

TV seems to imply the riskier the case the higher the amount the lawyer gets. Or the bigger the class action the higher the amount. Maybe the higher profile the case the more the lawyer may earn. Sometimes they seem to take cases with less chance of winning for the notoriety or fame. I would love to hear some perspectives on it.

 

[JaJa]

TV seems to imply the riskier the case the higher the amount the lawyer gets. Or the bigger the class action the higher the amount. Maybe the higher profile the case the more the lawyer may earn. Sometimes they seem to take cases with less chance of winning for the notoriety or fame. I would love to hear some perspectives on it.

In an ordinary contingency fee case its typically just about 1/3 goes to attorney fees. You take the payment as a whole and first subtract fees and costs – like if the lawyer paid experts etc etc . Then from what is left of that the lawyer takes 1/3. And the rest goes to the plaintiff. But in a class action its more complicated and there are no set rules beyond the fundamental ethical rule of a lawyer’s fees being “fair and reasonable” So how is the fee determined? First, whatever the fee is will have to be approved by the B Court Judge. So that at least is a level of oversight and accountability. The fee is arrived at by assessing a number of factors including: (i) the time the lawyer had to put into the case (a lawyer might just multiply his or her hours by her typical hourly billing rate or the hourly billing rate of an attorney of comparable skill in his or her jurisdiction); (ii) Did the lawyer have to pass up other paying cases to be available for this one?; (iii) the amount of the settlement or jury award; (iv) the complexity of the case; (v) the skill or reputation of the attorney. These are the basic factors you have to take into account. The plaintiffs lawyer/s will propose a fee, and again the B Court has to approve, adding a level of oversight.

 

[JaJa]

Also, there could be numerous lawyers involved, so that is a consideration.

Only to the extent that they split the fees. And that split would be based on who did the most work, who brought the most value to the case and who had the most plaintiffs

 

[JaJa]

I know you weren’t making such a claim yourself, but related to what you said, it always irritates me when various people use the argument “I don’t not work for free” as a justification for an absurd payment.

The funny part of this is many of us do do quite a bit of work for free. I know of no other profession where there is so much pro bono work done by so many. People never talk about that when they complain about legal fees though.

 

[KristyJ]

I feel like the reason that it seems so shocking to many of us is not necessarily the standard proportion that goes to a lawyer, but that most people, including many if not most of the gymnasts in this suit, will not earn $34 mil in their life. That combined with the nature of the suit makes it a very very noticeable amount. I don’t know what lawyers of Manly’s stature generally earn. I understand that those involved in the suit likely wanted to go with the best / most experienced. Even so it’s a number most of us will never see for a lifetime of hard work, even with the schooling that goes into “lower paying” professions (which is most of them).

 

[JaJa]

UPDATE: FBI stands by its decision not to prosecute the agents who dropped the ball on the case

https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/26/politics/larry-nassar-agents-fbi-justice-department-declines-charges/index.html

 

[Doug1233]

We all knew they’d do that. They’d already been cleared like, twice before, right?

Raisman, Biles, Nichols and Maroney must be wondering what on earth more they can do.

 

[JaJa]

they both lost their jobs. One “retired,” the other was fired. There was no way they were going to be criminally prosecuted. It was extreme incompetence, bad judgment, and grounds for dismissal. But not criminal prosecution.

 

[Doug1233]

But didn’t they lie under oath?