- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8950
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
- Fri Jan 21, 2011 12:00 am
#26361
Complete Question Explanation
(See the complete passage discussion here: lsat/viewtopic.php?t=10971)
The correct answer choice is (B)
This question asks us to weaken the author’s criticism of the LRCWA’s recommendations concerning contingency-fee agreements. As discussed in our VIEWSTAMP analysis above, the author’s argument against such agreements is outlined in the third and fourth paragraphs. The argument is largely speculative, assuming that the uplift agreements will cause an unfair burden on both lawyers and some clients. As with any causal argument, we can weaken this one by showing that the uplift agreements will not necessarily have the undesirable effects predicted by the author.
Answer choice (A): This answer choice addresses the popularity of uplift agreements, but that point is not central to the author's criticism of the LRCWA's recommendatinos. The author noted that "This restriction would unjustly limit freedom of contract," and that point is not affected by the current percentages of lawsuits filed by various groups.
Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice. If lawyers always took steps to evaluate a prospective client’s financial circumstances before taking on a case, then the introduction of the uplift agreement requirements will not place an unfair burden on them (lines 30-35). This answer choice weakens the causal relationship suggested by the author, and undermines her criticism of the LRCWA’s recommendations.
Answer choice (C): This answer choice is incorrect for two reasons: First, just because the LRCWA’s recommendations are unlikely to be implemented does not make their claims any less valid. Secondly, there is no reason to believe that the legal reform introduced by the LRCWA will be perceived as favoring lawyers.
Answer choice (D): This is the Opposite answer. If the total fees paid to lawyers working under uplift fee arrangements are virtually the same as those paid to lawyers who do not rely on such agreements, then the LRCWA’s recommendations make little sense. This would only bolster the author’s position that the proposed reform is onerous, strengthening her criticism of the LRCWA.
Answer choice (E): The relative lack of popularity of uplift agreements in jurisdictions that allow contingency-fee agreements has little bearing on the issue at stake, because we do not know why they are unpopular. If anything, this observation might add some credibility to the author’s view that uplift agreements are too burdensome to lawyers.
(See the complete passage discussion here: lsat/viewtopic.php?t=10971)
The correct answer choice is (B)
This question asks us to weaken the author’s criticism of the LRCWA’s recommendations concerning contingency-fee agreements. As discussed in our VIEWSTAMP analysis above, the author’s argument against such agreements is outlined in the third and fourth paragraphs. The argument is largely speculative, assuming that the uplift agreements will cause an unfair burden on both lawyers and some clients. As with any causal argument, we can weaken this one by showing that the uplift agreements will not necessarily have the undesirable effects predicted by the author.
Answer choice (A): This answer choice addresses the popularity of uplift agreements, but that point is not central to the author's criticism of the LRCWA's recommendatinos. The author noted that "This restriction would unjustly limit freedom of contract," and that point is not affected by the current percentages of lawsuits filed by various groups.
Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice. If lawyers always took steps to evaluate a prospective client’s financial circumstances before taking on a case, then the introduction of the uplift agreement requirements will not place an unfair burden on them (lines 30-35). This answer choice weakens the causal relationship suggested by the author, and undermines her criticism of the LRCWA’s recommendations.
Answer choice (C): This answer choice is incorrect for two reasons: First, just because the LRCWA’s recommendations are unlikely to be implemented does not make their claims any less valid. Secondly, there is no reason to believe that the legal reform introduced by the LRCWA will be perceived as favoring lawyers.
Answer choice (D): This is the Opposite answer. If the total fees paid to lawyers working under uplift fee arrangements are virtually the same as those paid to lawyers who do not rely on such agreements, then the LRCWA’s recommendations make little sense. This would only bolster the author’s position that the proposed reform is onerous, strengthening her criticism of the LRCWA.
Answer choice (E): The relative lack of popularity of uplift agreements in jurisdictions that allow contingency-fee agreements has little bearing on the issue at stake, because we do not know why they are unpopular. If anything, this observation might add some credibility to the author’s view that uplift agreements are too burdensome to lawyers.
