New Hampshire Revised Statutes
N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 508:4-e (2024)
Attorneys' Fees for Services
✓ 2024 N.H. RSA (Justia copy): later sessions are not included
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NH-GCgc.nh.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
508:4-e Attorneys' Fees for Services. –
I. Contingent fee agreements between attorney and client shall be governed by Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1.5 as it may be amended by the supreme court from time to time and by any other rules regarding fees which are adopted or amended by the court.
II. No attorney shall enter into such a contingent fee arrangement with his or her client without first advising the client of his or her right and affording the client an opportunity to retain the attorney under an arrangement whereby the attorney would be compensated on the basis of the reasonable value of his or her services.
III. All fees and costs for actions, resulting in settlement or judgment of $200,000 or more, shall be subject to approval by the court.
I. Contingent fee agreements between attorney and client shall be governed by Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1.5 as it may be amended by the supreme court from time to time and by any other rules regarding fees which are adopted or amended by the court.
II. No attorney shall enter into such a contingent fee arrangement with his or her client without first advising the client of his or her right and affording the client an opportunity to retain the attorney under an arrangement whereby the attorney would be compensated on the basis of the reasonable value of his or her services.
III. All fees and costs for actions, resulting in settlement or judgment of $200,000 or more, shall be subject to approval by the court.
Source. 1986, 227:13. 2002, 153:1, eff. Jan. 1, 2003.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases, 1995–2008 · leading case: Stewart v. Bader, 907 A.2d 931 (N.H. 2006).
Stewart v. Bader, 907 A.2d 931 (N.H. 2006). “The record shows that the plaintiff filed her contingency fee agreement with the court pursuant to RSA 508:4-e, III (1997) (repealed 2002). In February 2002, the defendant moved to unseal the case file, including the contingency fee agreement.”
Est. of Sicotte v. Lubin & Meyer, P.C., 959 A.2d 236 (N.H. 2008). “See RSA 508:4-e *672 (Supp. 2007); Super. Ct.”
Adolph Coors Co. v. Globe Dist., No. CV-92-447-JD (D.N.H. Mar. 29, 1995). “Fee Arrangements Are Properly Considered Under the New Hampshire Criteria Even if They Do Not Comport With RSA § 508:4-e and the Rules of Professional Conduct.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.