Skip to Main Content

CALL NOW FOR FREE CONSULTATION. YOU PAY NOTHING UNTIL WE WIN!

(702) 970-4222

What Percentage Do Personal Injury Lawyers Take in Nevada?

• FAQ

Nevada personal injury lawyers typically charge contingency fees, but Nevada law requires written agreements, reasonable fees, and special rules for medical malpractice. Learn how percentages work, how costs are handled, and what affects your net recovery.

Quick Answer

In Nevada, most personal injury lawyers charge a contingency fee, meaning the attorney’s fee is a percentage of the recovery and is typically owed only if there is a recovery. The exact percentage is not fixed by one universal Nevada statute for ordinary injury cases, it is set by contract, but it must be reasonable and the contingency agreement must be in writing and signed with required disclosures. (Nev. R. Prof’l Conduct 1.5(a); Nev. R. Prof’l Conduct 1.5(c)).

A major exception is medical malpractice/professional negligence cases against a provider of health care, where Nevada caps contingency fees at 35% of the “amount recovered,” as defined by statute. (NRS 7.095).

1) The percentage is not “one Nevada number,” it is a written contract controlled by Nevada ethics rules

Nevada’s Rules of Professional Conduct do not set one standard percentage for all injury cases. Instead, Nevada requires:

  • Reasonable fees and expenses. (Nev. R. Prof’l Conduct 1.5(a)).
  • A written, signed contingency fee agreement that explains how the fee is calculated and how expenses are handled. (Nev. R. Prof’l Conduct 1.5(c)).
  • A written closing statement at the end showing the outcome and how the recovery was distributed. (Nev. R. Prof’l Conduct 1.5(c)).

If a fee is disputed, Nevada courts evaluate reasonableness using recognized factors. The most-cited Nevada framework for assessing the reasonableness of attorney’s fees is the Brunzell factors. (Brunzell v. Golden Gate Nat’l Bank, 85 Nev. 345, 455 P.2d 31 (1969)).

What the Brunzell factors are, in plain English

Brunzell directs courts to consider, among other things:

  • The qualities of the advocate, including ability, training, education, experience, professional standing.
  • The character of the work to be done, including complexity, importance, responsibility.
  • The work actually performed.
  • The result achieved. (Brunzell v. Golden Gate Nat’l Bank, 85 Nev. 345, 455 P.2d 31 (1969)).

Even though Brunzell often comes up in court-awarded fee disputes, it also provides a practical benchmark for what Nevada views as “reasonable.”

2) Contingency fee percentages often vary by stage, and Nevada requires the contract to explain that clearly

Many Nevada contingency agreements use different percentages depending on whether the case resolves:

  • Before a lawsuit is filed (claim stage).
  • After filing suit (litigation stage).
  • At or after trial (trial stage).
  • On appeal (appeal stage).

Nevada law does not mandate a specific “ladder,” but Nevada requires the contingency agreement to state the method by which the fee is determined and to clearly address expenses. (Nev. R. Prof’l Conduct 1.5(c)).

The most important practical point

The question is not just “what percentage,” it is also:

  • Is the percentage calculated on the gross recovery or after certain deductions?
  • Are case costs deducted before or after the fee is calculated?
  • What costs can be charged to the client?
  • What happens to costs if there is no recovery? (Nev. R. Prof’l Conduct 1.5(c)).

3) Costs and expenses are different from the attorney’s percentage

Many clients hear “one-third” or “40%” and assume that is the only deduction. In reality, most cases also involve case costs, such as:

  • Medical record fees
  • Filing fees
  • Service of process
  • Deposition transcripts
  • Expert fees (in more complex cases)

Nevada allows lawyers to advance litigation expenses under specific ethical limitations, and the fee agreement must clearly explain how those expenses are handled. (Nev. R. Prof’l Conduct 1.8(e); Nev. R. Prof’l Conduct 1.5(c)).

If a settlement check comes in, Nevada requires careful handling of client funds and third-party interests. (Nev. R. Prof’l Conduct 1.15; SCR 217).

4) The big Nevada exception: medical malpractice contingency fees are capped

If your case is a professional negligence action against a provider of health care, Nevada imposes a statutory contingency fee cap:

  • A contingency fee may not exceed 35% of the amount recovered. (NRS 7.095(1)).
  • The cap applies to recoveries by settlement, arbitration, or judgment. (NRS 7.095(2)).
  • “Amount recovered” is defined by statute and is not always the same as the gross settlement number. (NRS 7.095(3)).

This cap is specific to the statutory category of cases described in the statute, it does not automatically apply to every injury claim that happens to involve medical treatment.

5) Your lawyer cannot settle your case without your decision, and settlement affects the fee

The client decides whether to accept a settlement offer. (Nev. R. Prof’l Conduct 1.2(a)). The attorney must keep the client reasonably informed and explain matters so the client can make informed decisions. (Nev. R. Prof’l Conduct 1.4).

This matters because settlement timing, and settlement structure, can affect:

  • The fee percentage under the contract.
  • The amount of costs incurred (experts and depositions often increase costs).
  • Liens and reimbursement claims that reduce net recovery.

Settlement agreements are contracts under Nevada law, so the terms should be clear and documented. (May v. Anderson, 121 Nev. 668, 119 P.3d 1254 (2005)).

6) Attorney liens can affect payout, and Nevada has a detailed lien law

Nevada provides for attorney liens by statute. (NRS 18.015). Lien issues come up most often when:

  • A client changes lawyers mid-case.
  • There is a dispute about fees or costs.
  • Multiple attorneys claim an interest in the recovery.

Nevada appellate cases addressing attorney liens and fee disputes include:
(Morse v. Dist. Ct., 65 Nev. 275, 195 P.2d 199 (1948); Figliuzzi v. Dist. Ct., 111 Nev. 338, 890 P.2d 798 (1995); Argentena Consol. Mining Co. v. Jolley Urga Wirth Woodbury & Standish, 125 Nev. 527, 216 P.3d 779 (2009); Leventhal v. Black & LoBello, 129 Nev. 472, 305 P.3d 907 (2013); Fredianelli v. Fine Carman Price, 133 Nev. 257, 402 P.3d 1254 (2017)).

A lien is not “extra money” on top of the contract, it is usually a mechanism to secure payment of fees or costs that are properly owed under the agreement or equitable principles recognized by Nevada law.

7) If you switch lawyers, you may still owe something, depending on the facts

Nevada recognizes that clients generally may discharge counsel, but changing lawyers can create:

  • A lien claim under NRS 18.015.
  • A claim for the reasonable value of services (quantum meruit) depending on the circumstances.

Nevada case law and lien decisions provide the legal framework for resolving these disputes. (NRS 18.015; Figliuzzi v. Dist. Ct., 111 Nev. 338, 890 P.2d 798 (1995); Argentena Consol. Mining Co. v. Jolley Urga Wirth Woodbury & Standish, 125 Nev. 527, 216 P.3d 779 (2009)).

8) A simple example of how “percentage” and “net” can differ

Example only, every contract is different.

  • Settlement: $100,000
  • Costs advanced: $3,500
  • Contingency fee: depends on your contract (Nev. R. Prof’l Conduct 1.5(c)).
  • Liens/reimbursement: varies (hospital liens, Medicaid, health insurance reimbursement, etc.)

The key is to ask for a written settlement statement showing the exact math, which Nevada requires in contingency matters at the conclusion. (Nev. R. Prof’l Conduct 1.5(c)).

Questions to ask before you sign a Nevada contingency fee agreement

  • What is the percentage if the case settles before suit, after suit, at trial, on appeal? (Nev. R. Prof’l Conduct 1.5(c)).
  • Are costs deducted before or after the fee is calculated? (Nev. R. Prof’l Conduct 1.5(c)).
  • What costs might I pay even if there is no recovery? (Nev. R. Prof’l Conduct 1.5(c)).
  • If my case is a medical malpractice case, how does NRS 7.095 affect the fee? (NRS 7.095).
  • Will you give me a written closing statement showing the distribution when the case ends? (Nev. R. Prof’l Conduct 1.5(c)).

Nevada legal authorities cited

  • NRS 7.095.
  • NRS 18.015.
  • SCR 217.
  • Nev. R. Prof’l Conduct 1.2(a).
  • Nev. R. Prof’l Conduct 1.4.
  • Nev. R. Prof’l Conduct 1.5(a).
  • Nev. R. Prof’l Conduct 1.5(c).
  • Nev. R. Prof’l Conduct 1.8(e).
  • Nev. R. Prof’l Conduct 1.15.
  • Brunzell v. Golden Gate Nat’l Bank, 85 Nev. 345, 455 P.2d 31 (1969).
  • May v. Anderson, 121 Nev. 668, 119 P.3d 1254 (2005).
  • Morse v. Dist. Ct., 65 Nev. 275, 195 P.2d 199 (1948).
  • Figliuzzi v. Dist. Ct., 111 Nev. 338, 890 P.2d 798 (1995).
  • Argentena Consol. Mining Co. v. Jolley Urga Wirth Woodbury & Standish, 125 Nev. 527, 216 P.3d 779 (2009).
  • Leventhal v. Black & LoBello, 129 Nev. 472, 305 P.3d 907 (2013).
  • Fredianelli v. Fine Carman Price, 133 Nev. 257, 402 P.3d 1254 (2017).

This blog is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Fee terms depend on the written agreement and case facts.

If you need assistance with your personal injury case, don’t hesitate to contact Friedman Injury Law.


Friedman Injury Law
375 N. Stephanie St., Ste. 1411
Henderson, NV 89014
P: (702) 970-4222
W: blakefriedmanlaw.com

@friedmaninjurylaw_