Another substantial difference between the two cases is that in Deans v. Armstrong the plaintiff was not given the choice of entering into a contingency fee agreement or of making payment for services rendered on a fee-for-service basis. I point out, moreover, that in the case on appeal, unlike Deans v. Armstrong, the plaintiff could have terminated the fee agreement prior to discovery and paid for services rendered up to the point of termination on a fee-for-service basis.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.