In Re Spak

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding requirements of then-Rule 1.5(c) as to contingency fee agreements contains no exception and rejecting argument the rule was not violated where client knew of fee arrangement from the outset and confirmed the terms in writing before the fees were received
• absent written contingent-fee contract, “[a] client in such a situation may be left with the unenviable choice of agreeing with his attorney’s recollection of the free agreement or delaying receipt of his money pending resolution of a fee dispute.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).