Lawsuit Good News/Bad News

[jay helfert]

Just a thought...but I wonder what the Nevada Gaming Commission would think about KT not paying off.

Good point. It may be one of many places where he has run afoul of the law.

True, the players may have trouble getting any money out of this stone, but they may be able to bring him to his knees in a criminal court. What a string of witnesses they would present.

I think he fears this more than anything else. And that is why he seeks to settle now for a token amount. Remember, he's had a taste of life on the other side of the bars. I doubt he wants another dose. If enough pressure is brought to bear on him, he may just cough up the money. All of it!

If it means staying out of jail, I bet he would find three million somewhere. Keep the pressure on!

 

[Timberly]

If it means staying out of jail, I bet he would find three million somewhere. Keep the pressure on!

I don't know Jay... he seems to enjoy having his pic taken on his way to the "other side of the bars".

 

[jay helfert]

jimmyg...Thanks for your kind remark. Your review of the nature of contingency fees is quite correct...except your experience differs from mine on the percentages.

My company initiated and prevailed via settlement in a very large karaoke copyright infringement action against two multi-billion dollar companies. I can't mention names due to a Confidentiality Agreement.

We had two co-defendants which, themselves, were multi-billion dollar companies. In that matter, wherein more than $7 million in settlement proceeds changed hands, the contingency fee was 30%.

Maybe I was an idiot for agreeing to that sum but counsel for the other co-plaintiffs...the names of which are household words in America were certainly well informed about the "going rate" for such cases.

In addition, please review the following...but please know that I am not arguing with you. I just think that any such fee percentage looms LARGE in the decision to sue vs. settle which is the topic of this thread.

Best regards,

Jim

Most jurisdictions in the United States prohibit working for a contingent fee in family law or criminal cases, as made clear in Rule 1.5(d) of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct of the American Bar Association.[1] In the United States, contingency fees are the standard in personal injury cases and are less common in other types of litigation. Fees range from 25% to 50% of the amount recovered, although 30-40% is the most common.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contingent_fee

Jim,

Out on the West Coast, one third (33%) is quite typical. The onerous attorneys go for 40%. In this case, let's say a good attorney could manage to get the three million for the players, by threatening both civil and criminal action against KT. The attorney gets their third and that leaves two thirds for the players. Still better than the offer on the table now (if it is real).

With the threat of criminal charges being filed, KT may want to settle a little quicker. Bankruptcy won't save him here. It is certainly ethical for an attorney to point out all possible criminal misconduct and make KT aware of the potential penalties if charges are filed. It's not like it hasn't been done before. Many scam artitsts have avoided jail time by making restitution.

And in many criminal proceedings, part of the penalties for guilty parties may well include restitution. Just see Enron for the most recent highly publicized case, where the defendants when found gulity, had to turn over nearly all their assets.

 

[jjinfla]

I don't know about pain and suffering but what if A) they got a group of lawyers for free and B) those lawyers went after the "guaranteed" $100,000 that each player was to make in 2007 along with the Reno payments and the "bonus" from the DVD sales?

Are you a blonde?

 

[jjinfla]

Timberly...<<what if A) they got a group of lawyers for free and B) those lawyers went after the "guaranteed" $100,000 that each player was to make in 2007 along with the Reno payments and the "bonus" from the DVD sales?>>

Lawyers for FREE?? In the United States?? Except for pro bono work for indigents and/or Public Defenders in criminal matters, do you know of any lawyers that will engage in a multi-year legal battle that will cost AT LEAST $200,000.00 worth of their time for free?

LOL

She definately must be a blonde.

I sure hope not because I am partial to blondes.

 

[av84fun]

Jay...<<let's say a good attorney could manage to get the three million for the players, by threatening both civil and criminal action against KT....It is certainly ethical for an attorney to point out all possible criminal misconduct and make KT aware of the potential penalties if charges are filed.>>

The later part is not correct Jay. Threatening criminal action to gain an advantage in a civil matter is HIGLY unethical under the Rules of Professional Conduct adopted in almost all states..

As noted below, you are correct that plaintiff's counsel can express the opinion that criminal action may have been commited..and the point is made...but lodging a threat that essentially says..."If you don't pay me what my client wants I will file criminal charges against you." is likely to get the lawyer disciplined if not disbarred.

Rule 4.5 Threatening Prosecution

a) A lawyer shall not threaten to present criminal, administrative or disciplinary charges to obtain an advantage in a civil matter nor shall a lawyer present or participate in presenting criminal, administrative or disciplinary charges solely to obtain an advantage in a civil matter.

(b) It shall not be a violation of Rule 4.5 for a lawyer to notify another person in a civil matter that the lawyer reasonably believes that the other's conduct may violate criminal, administrative or disciplinary rules or statutes.



<<The attorney gets their third and that leaves two thirds for the players. Still better than the offer on the table now (if it is real).>>

Not exactly Jay. Costs (which are generally taken off the top before the percentage fee is imposed) can be HUGE. And besides, more than 90% of all lawsuits are settled before the completion of trial if not before trial and by definition, settling means the plaintiff accepts less...generally MUCH less than the full amount being sought in the suit. 70% is pretty typical.

But even if the settlement is, say 80%...after the deduction of costs and the contingency fee an amount hot HUGELY greater than 33.33% would be left...and by settling you have a bird in the hand NOW...not 3-5 YEARS from now and "wired Aces" are worth a TON more than the other two lurking in the deck!

And here's another point to consider. There are two VERY DIFFERENT constituencies here. One, are the Top Pros...a few of which have plenty of money...then there is everyone else.

Those who have plenty of money can attack the IPT in order to secure revenge...and don't get me wrong...I LIKE revenge in appropriate circumstances.

But for the vast majority of the pros getting stiffed...they can REALLY USE the money...even 1/3 of the pie...so they can and should behave differently that those who are very well off financially.

Just my thoughts.

Best regards,
Jim

 

[Jack Flanagan]

(much too early on a Sunday morning),,,,been in State & Federal courts lots of times and have never spent a night in a Holiday Inn Express <disclaimer>

? any of these pros, who were stiffed by the con-man KT, live in Alabama ? if so they need to file the class action lawsuit in Alabama,,,juries in that state award the biggest payouts in the USA,,, (no joke, just the truth !)