A web release issued today speaks of the September 11th Victims Compensation Fund; created for people who lost loved ones in the attack. The Fund is a no-fault system designed to maximize compensation to the families of victims. Contingency fees by attorneys representing families were disfavoured. Against this background, simmons jannace & stagg represented a widow of a man who died in the attacks in connection with a lawsuit filed in federal court by the attorney who represented her before the Victims Compensation Fund. The attorney wanted $2,000,000 as a contingency fee. They filed a law suit in federal court requesting a declaratory judgment entitling him to his fee. Simmons, Jannace & Stagg disagreed with this law suit. Further details from the web release are quoted below. The precedent set by the simmons jannace & stagg law case means that disagreements referring to the September 11th victims compensation fund should now be litigated in the state courts.

Technical details of the simmons jannace &stagg law case; "Simmons, Jannace and Stagg moved to dismiss the federal action, arguing that the Victims Compensation Fund did not provide federal jurisdiction for an action by an attorney seeking to protect his fee. We also argued that there was no reported case that upheld jurisdiction under the Fund where the issue concerned a private dispute between an attorney and his former client concerning the amount of a legal fee. Simmons, Jannace & Stagg pointed out that there was no reported case upholding such an exorbitant fee for representation before the Victims Compensation Fund. Finally, we argued that the federal court should abstain because the state Surrogate’s Court had already begun an inquiry into the size of the attorney’s fee. The federal court, after hearing argument, issued an order and agreed that the Victims Compensation Fund did not provide federal court jurisdiction. The court also agreed with Simmons, Jannace & Stagg’s argument that it should abstain from exercising its jurisdiction. The court stated that given the pendency of the Surrogate’s Court proceeding, federal abstention doctrines mandated that the federal court abstain from exercising its jurisdiction unless and until the Surrogate’s Court proceeding was concluded. The court stayed the attorney’s action, but retained jurisdiction for the purpose of any renewed applications after the conclusion of the Surrogate’s Court case. As far as Simmons, Jannace & Stagg is aware, this is the first federal court decision holding that attorneys’ fee disputes arising out of the September 11th Victims Compensation Fund should be litigated in the state courts."