Nevadans overwhelmingly support an Uber-backed ballot question that would cap how much attorneys in the state can charge in civil case fees, according to a poll conducted last week and commissioned by supporters of the proposal.

The poll results, which were shared with The Nevada Independent, found that about 72 percent of respondents supported the proposal to cap attorney fees at 20 percent of all settlements and awards in civil cases. The level of support differed depending on how the question was phrased, and a greater number of respondents found the arguments from initiative supporters to be convincing. 

The poll comes as the proposal is facing an active challenge in the Nevada Supreme Court by groups representing Nevada trial lawyers and victims who were sexually abused by an Uber driver. The lawsuit, which has the support of unions and consumer advocacy organizations, argues that the petition misleads voters and represents a backdoor effort to stymie sexual misconduct lawsuits against the ride-sharing company by making it harder for victims to find effective legal representation. A Carson City judge dismissed the suit in May, but the ruling was appealed to the high court.

In a statement Thursday, lawyers representing hundreds of plaintiffs in a multi-district lawsuit regarding sexual abuse by Uber drivers said that they are “hopeful that once Nevadans learn the truth about Uber’s goals, they’ll side with the survivors over out-of-state special interests and their lobbyists.”

Attorney fees in civil cases are largely unregulated in Nevada, except that they must be considered reasonable, and fees in medical malpractice cases are capped at 35 percent of the total recovery. Lawyers retained by the state may take no more than 25 percent of the payout in attorney's fees.

The survey, which had a margin of error of about 4 percent and was conducted by Public Opinion Strategies (the pollster for NBC News and the Wall Street Journal), asked 655 registered voters by phone or via text last week whether they supported the proposal by providing two versions of the initiative. 

The informal version — which simply said the measure would cap attorney contingency fees in civil cases at 20 percent and ensure that plaintiffs receive 80 percent of settlements and awards — earned the support of 81 percent of respondents, with 14 percent opposed.

The more formal version presented to poll respondents more closely mirrors the actual ballot language. It included the part of Nevada law that would be amended and omitted the line about plaintiffs receiving 80 percent of awards. This version had the support of 70 percent of respondents, with 21 percent opposed.

“It reflects unusual strong support, and it's a very good sign of your capacity to pass a ‘Yes’ initiative,” said Bill McInturff, the co-founder of Public Opinion Strategies.

The poll also asked respondents how convincing they found several arguments made by supporters and opponents of the proposal, with supporters’ arguments found to be more convincing.

Eighty-six percent of respondents were persuaded by the argument that the current system often leaves victims with barely enough money to pay bills or cover the costs of their injuries. At least 78 percent of respondents also felt persuaded by the arguments that trial lawyers are gaming the system for their own advantage and spending millions on advertising at the expense of victims.

Meanwhile, fewer respondents found the anti-initiative arguments — which mirror the ones made in the legal challenge — to be convincing, though a majority of them still found them to be persuasive. These included arguments that the proposal makes it harder for victims to find legal representation (which 57 percent found convincing) and represents a “deceptive scheme” by corporations to limit payouts to victims (54 percent found convincing).

The petition is a statutory initiative, so supporters must gather and submit at least 102,362 valid signatures by Nov. 20, with at least 25,591 signatures coming from each of the state’s four congressional districts. If a sufficient number of signatures are gathered, it would go to the 2025 Legislature for approval. If the Legislature does not act on the initiative, the question would be placed on the 2026 general election ballot.

McInturff said that the only factor that could change the tides would be advertising. 

Nevadans for Fair Recovery, the PAC supporting the petition, raised $5 million this year, all from Uber. Citizens for Justice, the political arm of the Nevada Justice Association (the group behind the lawsuit), has raised more than $2.3 million, but it’s unclear how much of this was related to the petition. 

If the measure becomes law, Nevada would have the strictest attorney fee caps in the country. Two states have similar caps on attorney fees in civil cases: Oklahoma, whose limit is 50 percent of all rewards; and Michigan, which has imposed a 33 percent cap. In 2021, a 20 percent cap on attorney fees was proposed in California, but it failed to pass.

Updated on 7/26/24 at 12:30 p.m. to correct the title of the lawyers who provided the statement opposing the initiative .