Connecticut Statutes
§ 52-251c — Limitation on attorney contingency fees in personal injury, wrongful death and property damage actions. Waiver of limitation by claimant.
Connecticut § 52-251c
This text of Connecticut § 52-251c (Limitation on attorney contingency fees in personal injury, wrongful death and property damage actions. Waiver of limitation by claimant.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-251c (2026).
Text
(a)In any claim or civil action to recover damages resulting from personal injury, wrongful death or damage to property occurring on or after October 1, 1987, the attorney and the claimant may provide by contract, which contract shall comply with all applicable provisions of the rules of professional conduct governing attorneys adopted by the judges of the Superior Court, that the fee for the attorney shall be paid contingent upon, and as a percentage of:
(1)Damages awarded and received by the claimant; or (2) the settlement amount received pursuant to a settlement agreement.
(b)In any such contingency fee agreement such fee shall be the exclusive method for payment of the attorney by the claimant and shall not exceed an amount equal to a percentage of the damages awarded and received b
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Parnoff v. Yuille
57 A.3d 349 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 2012)
Jacobson v. Security-Conn. Life Ins., No. X03 Cv95 0493100s (Sep. 2, 1999)
1999 Conn. Super. Ct. 12221 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1999)
Biller v. Reilly, No. Cv93 30 10 30 S (Sep. 6, 1996)
1996 Conn. Super. Ct. 5496-GGG (Connecticut Superior Court, 1996)
Jacobson v. Security-Connecticut Life, No. X03 Cv95 0493100s (Aug. 9, 1999)
1999 Conn. Super. Ct. 10791 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1999)
Whitman Breed Abbott v. Heithaus, No. Cv00-01778265 (Sep. 5, 2000)
2000 Conn. Super. Ct. 10803 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2000)
Legislative History
(P.A. 86-338, S. 1; P.A. 87-227, S. 1; P.A. 91-380, S. 1; P.A. 04-257, S. 131; P.A. 05-275, S. 1.) History: P.A. 87-227 amended Subsec. (a) to change the applicability of the section from “In any claim or civil action accruing on or after October 1, 1986, seeking damages as compensation for personal injury or wrongful death” to “In any claim or civil action to recover damages resulting from personal injury, wrongful death or damage to property occurring on or after October 1, 1987”, to require the contract to comply with applicable provisions of the rules of professional conduct and to replace “damages awarded pursuant to a determination by the trier of fact” with “damages awarded and received by the claimant” and “amounts pursuant to a settlement agreement” with “settlement amount pursuant to a settlement agreement”, amended Subsec. (b) to replace “percentage of the award or settlement amount” with “percentage of the damages awarded and received by the claimant or of the settlement amount received by the claimant”, and added Subsec. (c) to define “damages awarded and received”, “settlement amount received” and “fee”; P.A. 91-380 amended Subsec. (c) by revising the definitions of “damages awarded and received” and “settlement amount received” to provide that the amount received by a claimant in a claim or civil action brought pursuant to Sec. 38a-368 shall be reduced by any basic reparations benefits paid to the claimant pursuant to Sec. 38a-365; P.A. 04-257 attempted to make changes to provisions added by vetoed P.A. 04-155 and therefore such changes were void and not given effect, and added Subsec. (d) defining “medical malpractice claim or civil action” and “health care provider”, effective June 14, 2004; P.A. 05-275 amended Subsec. (a)(2) to replace “settlement amount” with “the settlement amount received”, amended Subsec. (b) to replace “arrangement” with “agreement”, added new Subsec. (c) authorizing a claimant to waive the percentage limitations of Subsec. (b) if the claim or civil action is so substantially complex, unique or different from other wrongful death, personal injury or property damage claims or civil actions as to warrant a deviation from such percentage limitations and specifying factors that may indicate such complexity, uniqueness or difference, added new Subsec. (d) specifying the responsibilities of an attorney before a claimant enters into a contingency fee agreement that provides for a fee that exceeds the percentage limitations of Subsec. (b), added new Subsec. (e) specifying the requirements that a contingency fee agreement must comply with in order for a waiver of such percentage limitations to be valid, added new Subsec. (f) providing that if the claimant waives such percentage limitations the amount of the total fee is limited to 33.33% and the claimant is not required to repay any costs incurred by the attorney if there is no recovery, added new Subsec. (g) prohibiting payment of a fee to an attorney who seeks a fee that exceeds such percentage limitations unless the claimant has waived such limitations and the agreement complies with Subsec. (e), redesignated existing Subsec. (c) as Subsec. (h) and amended said Subsec. to delete from definitions of “damages awarded and received” and “settlement amount received” provision that in a claim or civil action brought pursuant to Sec. 38a-368 such amount shall be reduced by any basic reparations benefits paid to the claimant pursuant to Sec. 38a-365 and deleted former Subsec. (d) defining “medical malpractice claim or civil action” and “health care provider”, effective July 13, 2005, and applicable to causes of action accruing on or after that date. Cited. 214 C. 1; 223 C. 786; Id., 484; Id., 786; 231 C. 77; 235 C. 107. Plaintiff's failure to comply with section does not preclude him from recovering under doctrines of quantum meruit or unjust enrichment, regardless of whether bad faith by the successor attorney or client's waiver of section has been established. 255 C. 390. Cited. 28 CA 693; 43 CA 184; 45 CA 237. Section intended to regulate the attorney-client relationship in order to protect plaintiffs from excessive legal fees, and defendant insurer may assert section as a special defense in action by an attorney for interference with a contractual relation. 48 CA 699. Complaint filed by counsel against hospital was a civil action that sought recovery of damages resulting from personal injury which falls within the ambit of section; fee cap does not constitute an unconstitutional deprivation of the right to contract. 139 CA 147. Attorney who is barred from contract recovery because of fee agreement's failure to comply with section cannot recover from client under doctrine of quantum meruit. 163 CA 273. Benefits of section can be waived. 42 CS 526.
Nearby Sections
15
§ 52-109
Substituted plaintiff.Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
Connecticut § 52-251c, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/statute/ct/52-251c.