June 8th marked the latest chapter in the ongoing saga of attorney contingency fees in medical malpractice lawsuits.

The Amendment 3 issue was again argued before the Florida Supreme Court. Those in favor of capping attorney fees argued that a waiver should require a mandatory judicial review whenever a client waives the right to a reduced contingency fee.

At issue was a written waiver form drafted by The Florida Bar covering the points enumerated by the Supreme Court in its opinion following the first round of oral arguments in the fall of last year.

The Florida Bar countered that there should not be any restrictions on a plaintiff's right to waive the fee limits as it could hinder the plaintiff from being able to retain the best possible attorney or the attorney of their choice. The bar also argued that requiring judicial review for every case would be a poor use of judicial time, and the requirement would imply that the courts believe adult plaintiffs are not capable of making their own decisions on the matter.

The court made no decisions on the Amendment 3 issue at the conclusion of oral arguments, and it remains uncertain when a final ruling is expected. Stay on the lookout for the next issue of the Gamba & Lombana E-news for the latest developments on this very important issue.