CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 8Law, Economics, and Judicial SystemsDispute Resolution and Class ActionsLegal Education and Practice Innovations

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Fee Arrangements and Negotiation

Kritzer, Herbert M.·1987·Law & Society Review
DOI 10.2307/3053526
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This research note examines the relationship between fee arrangements and negotiation in civil litigation. Data collected by the Civil Litigation Research Project suggests a strong tendency for lawyers working on a contingent fee basis to focus their negotiation on monetary goals. While this finding should not be surprising, it has significant implications for recent discussions of negotiation and settlement.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/3053526

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 22

  1. JOHNSON, 1980-81, Lawyers' Choice: A Theoretical Appraisal of Litigation Investment Decisions, Law and Society Review, 567
  2. RAIFFA, 1982, The Art and Science of Negotiation:
  3. FRANKLIN Marc, 1961, Accidents, Money, and the Law: A Study of the Economics of Personal Injury Litigation, Columbia University Law Review, 1
  4. SEE, 1984, An Alternative to the Contingent Fee, Utah Law Review, 485
  5. Gelfand, 1984b, The Dimensions of Lawyer-Client Relations: Notes toward a Theory and a Field Study, American Bar Foundation Research Journal, 409
  6. FISHER, 1981, Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement without Giving in
  7. MENKEL-MEADOW, 1984, Toward Another View of Legal Negotiation: The Structure of Problem Solving, UCLA Law Review, 754
  8. MACKINNON, 1964, Contingent Fees for Legal Services
  9. BEDLIN, 1984, Unsettling Issues about Settling Civil Litigation: Examining ‘Doomsday Machines,’ ‘Quick Looks,’ and Other Modest Proposals, Judicature, 9
  10. Gelfand, 1980-81, Studying Disputes: Learning from the CLRP Experience, Law and Society Review, 503
  11. SCHWARTZ, 1970, An Economic Analysis of the Contingent Fee in Personal-Injury Litigation, Stanford Law Review, 1125
  12. CLERMONT, 1978, Improving on the Contingent Fee, Cornell Law Review, 529
  13. Gelfand, 1984c, Fee Arrangements and Fee Shifting: Lessons from the Experience in Ontario, Law and Contemporary Problems, 125
  14. KRITZER, 1985, The Impact of Fee Arrangement on Lawyer Effort, Law and Society Review, 251
  15. ROSENTHAL, 1974, Lawyer and Client: Who's in Charge?
  16. KRITZER, 1984, Understanding the Costs of Litigation: The Case of the Hourly-Fee Lawyer, American Bar Foundation Research Journal, 559
  17. WILLIAMS, 1983, Legal Negotiation and Settlement
  18. TRUBEK, 1983a, The Civil Litigation Research Project: Final Report
  19. KRITZER, Herbert M. (1985) “The Content of Negotiation in Ordinary Civil Cases.” Presented at a Roundtable on Non-Judicial Dispute Settlement, Conference Group on Political Economy, American Political Science Association Annual Meeting, New Orleans (August 29-September 1).
  20. BRAZIL, 1978, The Adversary Character of Civil Discovery: A Critique and Proposals for Change, Vanderbilt Law Review, 1295
  21. ROSENBERG, 1981, Expenses: The Roadblock to Justice, The Judges' Journal, 16
  22. KRITZER, 1984a, Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Law and Justice Statistics 1983

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 8

Metadata

Authors
Kritzer, H. M.
Affiliations
University of Minnesota (US)
Corresponding author
Kritzer, Herbert M.
ORCID
Kritzer, Herbert M.
Venue
Law & Society Review
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
1987
Volume
21
Issue
2
Pages
341-348
ISSN
  • 0023-9216 (ISSN-L)
  • 1540-5893
DOI
10.2307/3053526
OpenAlex
W2321555578
Cited by
8
References
0
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2
FWCI
1.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified, 13696 d)
Locations
Law & Society Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems
  • Social Sciences › Law › Dispute Resolution and Class Actions
  • Social Sciences › Law › Legal Education and Practice Innovations
Keywords
fee arrangements, negotiation, civil litigation, contingency fees, settlement, attorney-client relationship, settlement bargaining

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Fee Arrangements and Negotiation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/3053526
The paper
Kritzer, H. M. (1987). Fee Arrangements and Negotiation. Law & Society Review. https://doi.org/10.2307/3053526