In a recent poll commissioned by supporters of Uber's ballot initiative, Nevadans appeared to overwhelmingly back a proposal to cap attorney fees in civil cases at 20 percent of settlements and awards. The Nevada Independent reported that a staggering 72 percent of respondents expressed support for the measure.
But before we accept these results at face value, we must ask ourselves: Are Nevadans truly getting the full picture of what this initiative entails and its far-reaching consequences for justice in our state?
This polling data ignores that the initiative sponsored by the Nevadans for Fair Recovery PAC did not arise from grassroots dissatisfaction with attorney fees. It's not the product of concerned citizens gathering signatures at local farmers markets because they felt they were being taken advantage of by attorneys. No, this is a self-serving scheme backed by Uber to protect its bottom line at the expense of public safety and individual rights.
This attempt to shape public opinion and bypass the normal, deliberative legislative process in Nevada reveals a deeper problem with our political system. Ballot initiatives were once heralded as a triumph of direct democracy, a way for ordinary citizens to bypass entrenched political interests and enact change directly. But in our current reality, they've become just another tool for billionaires and corporations to impose their will on society.
We've seen this pattern before. In California, gig economy companies such as Uber, Lyft and DoorDash spent more than $200 million to pass Proposition 22, which classified their drivers as independent contractors rather than employees, denying them basic labor protections. In Florida, utility companies poured millions into a deceptive initiative that would have limited the expansion of solar energy. And now, here in Nevada, Uber is following the same playbook.
Ordinary people don't have the millions required to gather signatures, run ads (including on The Indy’s site) and push through a statewide ballot initiative. Only billionaires and large corporations do. And they're using this power not to improve our democracy or protect the vulnerable but to rig the system in their favor, insulating themselves from the consequences of their own negligence and bad business practices.
What's particularly troubling about this approach is how it bypasses the normal legislative process without thoughtful deliberation, debate, and consensus. In the Legislature, such proposals are normally subject to public hearings, expert testimony and debate. Stakeholders from all sides have the opportunity to voice their concerns and suggest amendments. But with a ballot initiative such as this, there's no such opportunity for nuanced discussion. It's a blunt instrument, presented to voters as a simple yes or no choice, often obscuring the complex consequences behind slogans and slick advertising campaigns.
This bypass of the legislative process comes at a steep cost, particularly for those who can't afford attorneys. In the Legislature, legal aid organizations, consumer advocacy groups and others who represent the interests of low-income Nevadans would have a voice. They could explain how limiting contingency fees would effectively bar the courthouse doors for many citizens.
Instead, we're faced with a corporate-written proposal that could reshape our legal system without this crucial input. It's a proposal that, if passed, would disproportionately harm those who already struggle to access justice — the poor, the working class, victims of corporate negligence and abuse.
Personal injury lawyers’ role in Nevada’s civil justice system
To truly understand what's at stake with Uber's initiative, we need to grasp what personal injury lawyers actually do. These attorneys aren't the "ambulance chasers" that negative stereotypes portray. They're dedicated professionals who help people who have been hurt due to someone else's actions or negligence — whether it's car accidents, medical mistakes or defective products.
Personal injury lawyers often become a crucial support system for people going through some of the toughest times in their lives. They fight against insurance companies and corporations to ensure their clients are compensated for medical bills, lost wages and pain suffered. It's not just about money; it's about justice and helping people rebuild their lives after tragedy.
The job is far from easy. These lawyers face significant emotional challenges, constantly dealing with people who are hurt, scared and angry. They spend their days investigating accidents, analyzing medical records and essentially acting as detectives, doctors and lawyers. Their income is often high-risk and unpredictable, working on a contingency fee basis where they only get paid if they win the case.
Uber's initiative threatens to upend this vital work. By capping fees at an unsustainably low level, it would make it financially impossible for many of these lawyers to take on complex cases, especially against well-resourced opponents such as Uber. This isn't about protecting Nevadans from “greedy” lawyers; it's about denying Nevadans access to the legal representation they need when they're at their most vulnerable.
Seeking justice and mercy with humility
My own journey into personal injury law may help put Uber’s efforts into perspective. For two decades, I have worked primarily as a defense attorney, representing insurance companies and corporations. But, earlier this year, I found myself at a crossroads professionally. For a month or so, I was not sure I was even going to remain an attorney. In this 20th year of my law practice, the question I wrestled with was: How do I want to spend the prime of my professional career during the next 10 years?
As I prayed and reflected on my career, I was reminded of my former client, Eddie. His case had a profound impact on me and on the trajectory of my career. When I met Eddie, he was a husband and the father of two boys. Eddie was operating a restriping machine when an impaired driver drove her car across the closed lanes and sideswiped the machine. Eddie was struck by the machine and then soaked from face to chest with the plastic striping material that was heated to 400 degrees.
Eddie’s face and body was severely burned; additionally, he sustained serious injuries to his left eye, mouth, arms, shoulder, left chest and left knee. When Eddie was referred to me a few months after his accident and injuries, his case had already been rejected by another firm because it was unwilling to take on the risk and expense given the complexities presented. Eddie was injured on the job and entitled to workers’ compensation benefits, while at the same time he had viable negligence causes of action against the driver and a product liability case against the company that built and sold the paint stripping machine.
Eddie and his family were devastated by a life-altering accident caused by an impaired driver and compounded by a defective machine. His story opened my eyes to the profound impact a dedicated attorney can have. I saw how legal advocacy could not only secure financial compensation but also drive meaningful change — holding a drunk driver accountable, pushing for industry wide safety improvements and providing resources for ongoing healing and recovery. Eddie's case wasn't just about winning a settlement; it was about changing lives and making our community safer.
Remembering this experience and a few others like it inspired me to make the career-altering decision to walk away from a law practice I had built for more than 20 years, start over and become a personal injury attorney. One of the most compelling reasons to pursue personal injury law is the opportunity to make a tangible difference in people's lives.
As a personal injury attorney, I get to serve as an advocate for those who have suffered harm, often during the most difficult periods of their lives. My work involves securing compensation for medical bills, lost wages and pain and suffering, which can be crucial for my clients' recovery and financial stability.
Beyond the monetary aspects of client service, I guide clients through complex legal and insurance processes, provide emotional support and help them achieve justice and closure. Every day I get to do this work, I'm reminded of the wisdom in Micah 6:8 — to act justly, love mercy and walk humbly. This transition wasn't just a change in my career; it was a realignment of my purpose, allowing me to fully embrace my "why" for being an attorney.
What kind of society do we want to be?
We stand at a crossroads. Down one path lies a Nevada where justice is reserved only for those who can afford it. Down the other, a Nevada that upholds the principles of equal justice for all.
This initiative isn't about "fair recovery" or reining in "billboard attorneys." It's about denying ordinary Nevadans their constitutional right to seek justice. It's about protecting corporate profits at the expense of public safety.
Do we want to be a society where corporations can use their vast resources to manipulate our laws and shield themselves from accountability? Or one where every citizen, regardless of their means, has a fair shot at justice?
Uber's ballot initiative isn't just about attorney fees. It's about the very fabric of our civil legal system and the principles of equality and justice that underpin our democracy. It's about whether we believe that the courthouse doors should be open to all, or only to those who can afford to pry them open.
Remember Eddie and the thousands like him. Think of the sexual assault survivors seeking justice, the workers injured on the job and the elderly victims of abuse. These are our neighbors, our friends, our family members. They could be any one of us. And when tragedy strikes, they deserve more than empty promises and corporate double-speak. They deserve a fighting chance.
By capping contingency fees at an unsustainably low level, this initiative wouldn't primarily harm lawyers — it would effectively deny access to justice for countless Nevadans who depend on personal injury attorneys. It would tilt the scales even further in favor of powerful corporations and insurance companies, leaving ordinary citizens to fend for themselves in a complex, costly and often hostile legal system.
As you think about this issue, I urge you to consider why we have a civil justice system in the first place? Why do we believe in holding wrongdoers accountable? Why do we, as a society, value justice and equality under the law?
For me, the answer lies in the faces of the clients I've served — in Eddie's resilience, in the relief of a family that can finally afford the medical care they desperately need, in the knowledge that our work can drive real, positive change in our community.
Let's ensure that in Nevada, the courthouse doors remain open to all. Because in the end, a society is judged not by how it treats its most privileged members, but by how it protects its most vulnerable.
Jason D. Guinasso is an attorney with Greenman Goldberg Raby & Martinez in Reno and Las Vegas. Licensed in Nevada and California, he is a litigator and trial attorney. He also teaches business law at UNR and is a graduate student in the MALTS program at Regent College in Vancouver, British Columbia. The opinions expressed in this op-ed are those of the author in his personal capacity and do not necessarily reflect the views of his law firm, its clients or any other organization with which the author may be affiliated.
