Attorney fee calculations in New Hampshire

Quick takeaways

• New Hampshire attorney fee “estimates” depend on the fee arrangement. DocketMath’s attorney-fee calculator can model either hourly (lodestar-style) or contingent fee structures, then helps you sanity-check ranges.
• Contingent fees in New Hampshire are governed by the Rules of Professional Conduct. Specifically, N.H. R. Prof. Conduct 1.5 requires fee terms to be reasonable, and it contemplates client information about the right to be compensated on the basis of the reasonable value of services.
• RSA 508:4-e ties contingent fee agreements to Rule 1.5. If your matter involves a settlement or judgment, RSA 508:4-e provides the statutory framework and references the governing Rule 1.5 standards.
• Use the right inputs. Missing items like hourly rate, estimated hours, or the contingency percentage can shift your estimate more than most other assumptions.

Inputs you need

Before using DocketMath’s /tools/attorney-fee calculator, gather the details that map cleanly to New Hampshire fee concepts. The calculator works best when you can supply numeric assumptions.

1) Pick your fee model (this changes the math)

• Hourly / flat-rate (non-contingent)
• Contingent fee (percentage of settlement or judgment)

2) If hourly / flat-rate, collect

• Hourly rate (your firm’s rate or the rate stated in the engagement agreement)
• Estimated hours (or billed-to-date plus a forecast)
• Costs you expect to be recovered separately (optional but helpful)
• Cap or maximum fee (if your contract uses one)

3) If contingent, collect

• Contingency percentage (e.g., 25% of settlement or judgment)
• Gross recovery amount you’re modeling (the settlement or judgment figure)
• Any tiered percentages (if your agreement scales the rate by stage, enter the relevant stage assumptions)
• Costs treatment: included in contingency or separately deducted (match what the engagement agreement says)

4) Settlement/judgment amount context (New Hampshire-specific relevance)

RSA 508:4-e references contingent fee agreements and governance by Rule 1.5. Practically, for DocketMath inputs, you’ll want to decide what amount the contingency is calculated on (a settlement figure vs. a judgment total) and then apply your agreement’s structure to that base.

Quick mapping table

How the calculation works

DocketMath applies different internal formulas depending on the fee model you select. Below is a practical walkthrough of the logic you’ll see reflected in the calculator results.

A) Hourly / flat-rate scenario (non-contingent)

1. Compute base fee

   • Base fee = Hourly rate × Estimated hours
2. Add optional costs (if your scenario treats costs as recoverable)

   • Total = Base fee + Costs
3. Range-check with assumptions

   • If estimated hours are uncertain, adjust hours first—scenario planning often shows hours matter more than small rate changes.

Illustrative example (not legal advice):

• Rate: $300/hour
• Hours: 20
• Base fee: $6,000
• Costs (optional): $750
• Total: $6,750

B) Contingent fee scenario (percentage of recovery)

1. Compute contingent fee

   • Contingent fee = Percentage × Settlement/Judgment amount
2. Apply costs treatment based on your agreement terms

   • If your agreement deducts costs before computing the contingency, the sequence matters.
   • If your agreement treats costs as separate from the contingency, you add costs separately after the contingency calculation.

Illustrative example (not legal advice):

• Percentage: 25%
• Settlement: $40,000
• Contingent fee: $10,000
• Costs: depends on the contract’s costs sequence

C) Where New Hampshire law affects interpretation (reasonableness/limits)

DocketMath estimates the numbers; New Hampshire law focuses on whether the fee arrangement is permissible and reasonable when applied.

Rule 1.5 and RSA 508:4-e linkage

New Hampshire requires contingent fee arrangements to be governed by N.H. R. Prof. Conduct 1.5, including the requirement that fees be reasonable and the concept that clients are informed of the right to compensation on the basis of the reasonable value of services. RSA 508:4-e further reinforces the contingent-fee governance framework and connects contingent-fee agreements to Rule 1.5.

Key points to keep in mind when you interpret your DocketMath output:

• Reasonableness requirement (Rule 1.5): the final fee is evaluated using reasonableness factors under the rule.
• Client information concept: Rule 1.5 contemplates client notice about compensation on a reasonable-value basis for contingent fee arrangements.
• Contingent fee governance (RSA 508:4-e): the statute explicitly ties contingent fee agreements to Rule 1.5 and addresses the settlement/judgment context.

Default-period note (explicit, as provided)

No claim-type-specific sub-rule was found for the “default period.” In plain terms: treat RSA 508:4-e’s general/default period as the governing default for contingent-fee governance when no more specific subsection applies. If you’re not sure whether a more specific period applies to your scenario, you’ll want a careful review of the statute text relevant to your case category.

D) Using the calculator output to run scenarios

Once you generate an estimate, vary one assumption at a time:

• Hourly: increase estimated hours by ~10–25% to model common schedule slippage, then compare the change in total.
• Contingent: compare percentages (e.g., 20%, 25%, 30%) and evaluate how net recovery changes as you change the fee rate and the modeled recovery base.

This helps you identify whether your financial risk is driven more by time (hours) or outcome (settlement/judgment).

Common pitfalls

Most estimation errors come from input mismatches, not the math. Here are the most common New Hampshire-relevant issues to watch for:

1. Using the wrong recovery base for contingent fees

   • If your contract calculates the contingency on a gross settlement but you input a net number, your estimate will be off.

2. Ignoring the agreement’s costs treatment

   • Contingency agreements vary: some deduct costs before applying the percentage; others add costs separately.
   • DocketMath only reflects what you enter—so align your inputs with the engagement agreement’s cost sequence.

3. Assuming a “reasonable” number is automatically compliant

   • Even if the output looks clean, contingent fees must still be governed by N.H. R. Prof. Conduct 1.5, including the rule’s reasonableness and client-information concepts.

4. Overreliance on a single forecasted hours figure

   • In hourly scenarios, underestimating discovery, motion practice, or delays can swing the estimate more than a modest rate change.

5. Misinterpreting how RSA 508:4-e applies

   • RSA 508:4-e is statutory guidance for contingent fee agreements and their governance framework.
   • If your matter doesn’t actually fall into the “settlement or judgment” contingency context (or you’re using the wrong period), your modeling assumptions may not match the legal framework.

Pitfall to avoid: entering costs both as a separate line item and as part of the recovery base for a contingent scenario can double-count economics and inflate the estimated total.

Sources and references

• RSA 508:4-e (New Hampshire statutory framework referencing governance of contingent fee agreements by attorney-conduct rules)
  https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/LII/508/508-4-e.htm
  Statute excerpt (as provided): “Contingent fee agreements between attorney and client shall be governed by Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1.5. Attorneys shall inform clients of the right to be compensated on the basis of the reasonable value of services. All fees and costs for actions resulting in settlement or judgment of $2...”
• N.H. R. Prof. Conduct 1.5 (reasonableness of fees; contingent fee-related client information concepts)
  TODO: add official citation link / official rule page if you want a source URL here.

Next steps

1. Open DocketMath’s /tools/attorney-fee calculator.
2. Select the fee model (hourly vs. contingent) that matches your engagement terms.
3. Populate inputs from the agreement:

   • Hourly: rate and estimated hours (include forecasted work)
   • Contingent: contingency percentage and the modeled settlement/judgment amount
4. Run 2–3 sensitivity scenarios:

   • Hourly: compare lower/likely/higher hours (e.g., -15% / baseline / +25%)
   • Contingent: compare different percentages and verify your chosen recovery base is the one the agreement uses
5. Do a quick compliance check (non-legal-advice checklist):

   • Does the fee