Are Contingency Fees Regulated?
Yes. Contingency fees are regulated at both the national level by ABA Model Rule 1.5 and at the state level by each state's rules of professional conduct. They are prohibited in criminal and most domestic relations cases. Several states impose fee caps in medical malpractice.
What Do the ABA Model Rules Say?
Direct Answer: Yes. Contingency fees in the US are regulated by ABA Model Rule 1.5 and adopted state bar rules. Agreements must be in writing, specify the percentage, and identify deductible expenses. Many states cap fees in medical malpractice cases, and contingency is prohibited in criminal and most domestic cases.
The American Bar Association's Model Rules of Professional Conduct provide the national framework for contingency fee regulation. While the Model Rules are not directly enforceable, nearly every state has adopted some version of them.
Rule 1.5(a) — Reasonableness: All fees must be "reasonable." The rule lists eight factors for evaluating reasonableness, including time and labour, complexity, customary fee in the locality, amount involved, and whether the fee is contingent.
Rule 1.5(c) — Written Agreement: A contingency fee agreement must be in writing, signed by the client, and must state the method of fee determination, the expenses to be deducted, and whether the fee is calculated before or after expenses.
Prohibited Case Types
Criminal Cases
Model Rule 1.5(d)(2) prohibits contingency fees in criminal defence. The rationale is that such arrangements could create incentives for the attorney to encourage plea bargains or discourage the client from asserting constitutional rights.
Domestic Relations
Model Rule 1.5(d)(1) prohibits contingency fees in domestic relations matters where the fee is contingent on securing a divorce, or on the amount of alimony, support, or property settlement. This does not prohibit contingency fees for collecting past-due support payments.
State Fee Caps
| State | Cap / Regulation | Case Type |
|---|---|---|
| California | MICRA sliding scale (25%–10%) | Medical malpractice |
| New York | Judiciary Law § 474-a sliding scale | Medical/dental/podiatric malpractice |
| Florida | Bar Rule 4-1.5(f)(4)(B) schedule | All personal injury (presumed reasonable) |
| Connecticut | 33⅓% cap | Personal injury |
| New Jersey | Sliding scale (33⅓%–20%) | All tort claims (Court Rule 1:21-7) |
| Federal (SSDI) | 25% / $9,200 max | Social Security Disability |
Enforcement & Remedies
If a contingency fee is found to be unreasonable or the agreement non-compliant, several remedies are available:
- Fee arbitration: Most state bars offer mandatory or voluntary fee dispute resolution programs
- Court review: Courts can reduce fees found to be clearly excessive
- Disciplinary action: The attorney may face reprimand, suspension, or disbarment for charging unconscionable fees
- Voidable agreement: In some states, non-compliant contingency fee agreements are voidable at the client's option
Frequently Asked Questions
You May Also Be Interested In
Where this applies: Contingency fee rules are set state by state. Check your own state's rules before acting.
Sources for this page
Every rule stated above is based on the primary sources below. Each link goes to the legislation, court rule or regulator itself so you can check it. Last verified 2 August 2026.
- ABA Model Rule 1.5 (Fees)
Model, not law. Each state adopts its own version. Rule 1.5(d) bars contingency fees in most domestic relations matters and in criminal defence.
- Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 6146 (medical malpractice attorney fees) · in force from 1 January 2023
As amended by AB 35 (Stats. 2022 ch. 17 § 2): 25% if settled before a complaint or arbitration demand is filed, 33% after. The former 40/33⅓/25/15 sliding scale no longer applies.
- Rules Regulating The Florida Bar, Rule 4-1.5 (fees and costs)
Rule 4-1.5(f)(4)(B) sets the contingency fee schedule presumed reasonable.
- N.Y. Judiciary Law § 474-a (medical malpractice fee schedule)
Sliding scale: 30% of the first $250,000, descending to 10% above $1,250,000.
- Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1.04 (fees)
Who wrote and checked this page
- Written and published by
- Edward & Amaury Solicitors (Edward & Amaury Ltd, company no. 12195443), regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under no. 800525.
- Legal review
- This page has not yet been through independent legal review. It is written from the primary sources listed below, which you can check directly.
- Review dates
- Last reviewed 2 August 2026. Next review due 2 February 2027.
Fee rules change. California’s medical malpractice fee limits changed on 1 January 2023, and the QOCS rules in England and Wales changed on 6 April 2023. If you spot something out of date, tell us — we publish corrections.