The contingency-fee system, which allows lawyers and their clients to agree that the lawyer will be paid only in the event of success, does not increase the number of medical malpractice lawsuits brought against doctors. As attorneys must cover the costs for their time and research, they want to be assured that any medical malpractice case they accept on a contingency-fee basis has substantial merit. Consequently, attorneys turn away many people who come to see them, for lack of a good case.
The argument above is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it fails to
specify the criteria attorneys use to judge the merits of a medical malpractice case
consider whether, in the absence of a contingency-fee option, even people with meritorious cases are much less likely to initiate litigation if they believe they might incur large legal fees
note whether, in successful medical malpractice lawsuits, the average monetary award after legal costs have been deducted is less under contingency-fee arrangements than otherwise
consider the effect of the contingency-fee system on the number of lawsuits sought for reasons other than medical malpractice
acknowledge the rising cost of medical malpractice insurance
1. 胜诉付费系统(在该系统下律师只会在赢得案件的时候拿钱)并没有增加针对医生的医疗诉讼事件
2. 因为律师必须cover他们的调研成本,他们希望能够保障在条件付费下的案件有重要的利益。
3. 所以,律师不接待许多客户,因为缺少好的案件。
P:条件付费、案件不好→律师拒绝了大部分案件
C:医疗案件没有增加
B选项若成立,在只需要付胜诉费时时,那些好案件的当事人也不愿意提起诉讼,因为他们觉得可能会产生巨大的法律费用。
即医疗案件没有增加的原因不是律师拒绝了大部分案件,而是很多人因为穷不想提起诉讼。
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论