that definitely changes the narrative. 800k in legal expenses! That's a lot of money. The headline should be "lawyers make 800k by suing uber". How was the damage calculated by the way?
Also factor in the risk of working 1600 hours and getting paid nothing for it if the case was lost.
> What's the risk they were taking? They wouldn't have taken the case if the risk of losing was high?
The fact the Uber has all the money in the world to hire good layers. And a motive to make it seem like its not directly them but their subcontractors problem, that is bigger than this single case.
In such cases, there is no such thing as a sure thing.
Depends how you define high.
75% chance of winning is still a 25% chance of the lawyers walking away with nothing. Lawyers who operate like this are effectively making a calculated investment of their own time (which could be money from paying clients) as well as associate and support time (which is money) and they do deserve to be compensated for their time and the investment must pay off above just directly time in (e.g. they have to be allowed to make profit here!).
While I don't LOVE the proportions with 60% of the money going to the attorneys, I don't know enough about the case to judge it and there are remedies if the plaintiff thinks their attorneys are inflating expenses.