This is the old version of the H2O platform and is now read-only. This means you can view content but cannot create content. You can access the new platform at https://opencasebook.org. Thank you.
Attorneys general do not operate in a vacuum and are very often not the only parties on their side of a case. With the realities of state budget reductions and the increased scope of the matters that attorneys general address, it is not surprising that attorneys general are often offered assistance by private litigants and their lawyers sometimes on a contingency basis.
This Chapter explores the legal and ethical issues that arise from this practice.
The readings are grouped into two categories, e.g. retention of plaintiff counsel and retention of defense counsel.EDIT PLAYLIST INFORMATION DELETE PLAYLIST
Edit playlist item notes below to have a mix of public & private notes, or:MAKE ALL NOTES PUBLIC (2/2 playlist item notes are public) MAKE ALL NOTES PRIVATE (0/2 playlist item notes are private)
With the certification of private class action cases becoming more and more difficult, private class counsel often seek to be retained by attorneys general to pursue consumer, antitrust and qui tam matters.
This practice is strongly opposed by business organizations such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and there has been substantial litigation on whether attorneys general are legally allowed to retain contingent counsel.
|1.1||Show/Hide More||State of Rhode Island v. Lead Industries Association, Inc.|
May 21, 2013
This is the old version of the H2O platform and is now read-only. This means you can view content but cannot create content. If you would like access to the new version of the H2O platform and have not already been contacted by a member of our team, please contact us at email@example.com. Thank you.