lieff cabraser's claim Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
-
- Posts: 432496
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
lieff cabraser's claim
"Since our founding forty years ago, Lieff Cabraser has participated in many of the most important individual and class action lawsuits in the United States, helping recover over $85 billion in verdicts and settlements for our clients"
Is this correct? Something seems incredibly wrong about this firm existing. Do they actually get a third of that?
Anybody else find their "Justice . . . " quotes kind of corny?
Is this correct? Something seems incredibly wrong about this firm existing. Do they actually get a third of that?
Anybody else find their "Justice . . . " quotes kind of corny?
-
- Posts: 2777
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:19 pm
Re: lieff cabraser's claim
They probably get less than a third. Still big big money. $85 billion is probably accurate.Anonymous User wrote:"Since our founding forty years ago, Lieff Cabraser has participated in many of the most important individual and class action lawsuits in the United States, helping recover over $85 billion in verdicts and settlements for our clients"
Is this correct? Something seems incredibly wrong about this firm existing. Do they actually get a third of that?
Anybody else find their "Justice . . . " quotes kind of corny?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lieff_Cabr ... _Bernstein
Why is it wrong?
-
- Posts: 922
- Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 10:36 pm
Re: lieff cabraser's claim
What makes you think their take (i.e. fees) is a 1/3 of the recovery?Anonymous User wrote:"Since our founding forty years ago, Lieff Cabraser has participated in many of the most important individual and class action lawsuits in the United States, helping recover over $85 billion in verdicts and settlements for our clients"
Is this correct? Something seems incredibly wrong about this firm existing. Do they actually get a third of that?
Anybody else find their "Justice . . . " quotes kind of corny?
With a typical securities case, the recovery is based on a fee's motion and the actual fees award can vary on a variety factors, e.g. whether the court uses a lodestar method, etc.
Lieff also does qui tam lawsuits, and for those it is the relator (or plaintiff) that actually recovers anywhere from 20-30% of any settlement amount. I'd imagine that Lieff's take is at best another 1/3 of that recovery. So to make the math easy for you, if the settlement is 100, plaintiff gets 30, then Lieff gets ~10 (assuming a 30% recovery for both plaintiff and lawyer).
So there's nothing corny, or incredibly wrong about their statements.
-
- Posts: 432496
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: lieff cabraser's claim
jfc, they made at least $8B from lawyering?anon168 wrote:What makes you think their take (i.e. fees) is a 1/3 of the recovery?Anonymous User wrote:"Since our founding forty years ago, Lieff Cabraser has participated in many of the most important individual and class action lawsuits in the United States, helping recover over $85 billion in verdicts and settlements for our clients"
Is this correct? Something seems incredibly wrong about this firm existing. Do they actually get a third of that?
Anybody else find their "Justice . . . " quotes kind of corny?
With a typical securities case, the recovery is based on a fee's motion and the actual fees award can vary on a variety factors, e.g. whether the court uses a lodestar method, etc.
Lieff also does qui tam lawsuits, and for those it is the relator (or plaintiff) that actually recovers anywhere from 20-30% of any settlement amount. I'd imagine that Lieff's take is at best another 1/3 of that recovery. So to make the math easy for you, if the settlement is 100, plaintiff gets 30, then Lieff gets ~10 (assuming a 30% recovery for both plaintiff and lawyer).
So there's nothing corny, or incredibly wrong about their statements.
-
- Posts: 98
- Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 3:37 pm
Re: lieff cabraser's claim
Joe Jamail got 12 bilyawn dollars.Anonymous User wrote:jfc, they made at least $8B from lawyering?anon168 wrote:What makes you think their take (i.e. fees) is a 1/3 of the recovery?Anonymous User wrote:"Since our founding forty years ago, Lieff Cabraser has participated in many of the most important individual and class action lawsuits in the United States, helping recover over $85 billion in verdicts and settlements for our clients"
Is this correct? Something seems incredibly wrong about this firm existing. Do they actually get a third of that?
Anybody else find their "Justice . . . " quotes kind of corny?
With a typical securities case, the recovery is based on a fee's motion and the actual fees award can vary on a variety factors, e.g. whether the court uses a lodestar method, etc.
Lieff also does qui tam lawsuits, and for those it is the relator (or plaintiff) that actually recovers anywhere from 20-30% of any settlement amount. I'd imagine that Lieff's take is at best another 1/3 of that recovery. So to make the math easy for you, if the settlement is 100, plaintiff gets 30, then Lieff gets ~10 (assuming a 30% recovery for both plaintiff and lawyer).
So there's nothing corny, or incredibly wrong about their statements.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 2777
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:19 pm
Re: lieff cabraser's claim
Probably. TBF, they are a very large firm as plaintiff's side boutiques go.Anonymous User wrote:jfc, they made at least $8B from lawyering?anon168 wrote:What makes you think their take (i.e. fees) is a 1/3 of the recovery?Anonymous User wrote:"Since our founding forty years ago, Lieff Cabraser has participated in many of the most important individual and class action lawsuits in the United States, helping recover over $85 billion in verdicts and settlements for our clients"
Is this correct? Something seems incredibly wrong about this firm existing. Do they actually get a third of that?
Anybody else find their "Justice . . . " quotes kind of corny?
With a typical securities case, the recovery is based on a fee's motion and the actual fees award can vary on a variety factors, e.g. whether the court uses a lodestar method, etc.
Lieff also does qui tam lawsuits, and for those it is the relator (or plaintiff) that actually recovers anywhere from 20-30% of any settlement amount. I'd imagine that Lieff's take is at best another 1/3 of that recovery. So to make the math easy for you, if the settlement is 100, plaintiff gets 30, then Lieff gets ~10 (assuming a 30% recovery for both plaintiff and lawyer).
So there's nothing corny, or incredibly wrong about their statements.
-
- Posts: 922
- Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 10:36 pm
Re: lieff cabraser's claim
Let's assume your math is right (but I don't think it is, because their fees recovery is probably less). That would be 8B/40 years = 200M/year. That's gross revenue, not net profit.Anonymous User wrote:jfc, they made at least $8B from lawyering?anon168 wrote:What makes you think their take (i.e. fees) is a 1/3 of the recovery?Anonymous User wrote:"Since our founding forty years ago, Lieff Cabraser has participated in many of the most important individual and class action lawsuits in the United States, helping recover over $85 billion in verdicts and settlements for our clients"
Is this correct? Something seems incredibly wrong about this firm existing. Do they actually get a third of that?
Anybody else find their "Justice . . . " quotes kind of corny?
With a typical securities case, the recovery is based on a fee's motion and the actual fees award can vary on a variety factors, e.g. whether the court uses a lodestar method, etc.
Lieff also does qui tam lawsuits, and for those it is the relator (or plaintiff) that actually recovers anywhere from 20-30% of any settlement amount. I'd imagine that Lieff's take is at best another 1/3 of that recovery. So to make the math easy for you, if the settlement is 100, plaintiff gets 30, then Lieff gets ~10 (assuming a 30% recovery for both plaintiff and lawyer).
So there's nothing corny, or incredibly wrong about their statements.
Which doesn't even crack them into the AmLaw 100 based on total revenue. So it's not very much when you think about it in context.
Granted LCH&B has only about 70 (or so) attorneys, so while it's alot of money, it's not as much nearly as you think it is.
That said, it's still a nice tidy sum (again, assuming your basic assumptions on 8B is correct). This is why people go into plaintiffs' side work. The payoff can be great (although not as great as you think it may be just by looking at the bare, absolute numbers).
- Tangerine Gleam
- Posts: 1280
- Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 4:50 pm
Re: lieff cabraser's claim
I believe it.
-
- Posts: 432496
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: lieff cabraser's claim
do they do profit sharing