So what about the other side, or do you only sue deep pocket corporations with lawyers on retianer? (Not snark, an honest question. There’s 2 sides to each suit - if both are contingency, only one gets paid).
That’s all? So your basically just making stuff up, huh? 
During my VERY brief stint in private practice, I did collections/bankruptcy/foreclosure for a couple of S&Ls. On an hourly basis. Firmly believed it was not worth litigating a claim under $10k. And then, when you get a judgment, collecting on it is a whole nuther matter.
The administrative claims I work with now are nearly all contingency. Many lawyers exert minimal effort, just hoping to make $ from volume.
I don’t think both sides are on contingency very often, if ever. Because generally, only one side will be potentially awarded money - if a sue a business because I fell down their stairs, there is no chance of them being awarded money but the lawyer defending the buiness isn’t going to be on contingency.
correct. It would be highly unusual for the defense to be on a contigency. Would need to be a counter claim, or perhaps “we take 20% of what you don’t have to pay” kind of deal. (which I’ve never seen)
I will say that the fact the case went to trial is a very good indication that, at some point, the judge hearing the case denied the defense’s motion to dismiss the case. That’s a good indication that a judge ruled that the plaintiffs showed that they didn’t have “absolutely no case”.
I vaguely recall, perhaps from a Legal Eagle video, that, so long as there is no dispute as to what was said, defamation cases are less likely than others to be decided at summary judgment, in part because of how wishy washy the question of reputational damage(s) can be. Also the fact vs. opinion question.
A Japanese company I worked for in the 90s sued an American company in America for $1 million of actual damages.
We settled for 60 cents on the dollar and both paid our own fees. It had only gotten through part of the depositions, and we racked up $100 k in fees.