DISCUSSION: This question gives us no hints, so you just have to look at the answers and think about which is the most likely. Then check to see if you can confirm it in the passage.
Don’t focus on any of the answers until you look at all of them. Your goal should be to start at the most likely answer.
- CORRECT. This is central to the passage. If you missed this answer, you should stop now, reread the whole passage, and reread my analysis.
- The passage didn’t say what kind of fees lawyers “deserve”. That’s a tricky moral question. It only talked about not depriving clients of their just compensation (line 19)
It’s possible that court cases generally wouldn’t have enough money it in to provide both “just” compensation and the fee the lawyer “deserved”.
- The author never said if the recommendations were likely to be enacted. They stick to critiquing the recommendations.
- This contradicts the passage. The author said that contingency fee arrangements usually increase lawyers’ diligence. See lines 57-59.
- The author actually never says what normal contingency fee arrangements are like. They stick to critiquing the LRCWA’s proposal.
Want a free Reading Comp lesson?
Get a free sample of the Reading Comprehension Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving RC questions