As a mediator, I’m often reminded of the hidden pressures that lawyers carry into the room. In a recent mediation, I stepped into a private caucus just in time to catch the tail end of a plaintiff venting at his own lawyer, threatening to march the case to trial unless he got a set dollar figure in his pocket. It took me right back to my own days in practice, sitting across from demanding clients who needed to be reminded that I was working on contingency, fronting the disbursements myself, and grinding forward in a system where trial could be years away. Those conversations were never easy, but they underscored a simple truth: managing expectations — with compassion but also with candour — is as much a part of advocacy as drafting pleadings or arguing in court.

Plaintiff counsel often speak in quiet, closed-door conversations about one of the most difficult balancing acts in personal injury litigation: how to manage the over-demanding client. These are not bad people. In fact, they’re usually deeply hurt, frightened, and unsure of where to turn. They’ve been injured, their lives disrupted, their trust in the system shaken — and now they want their lawyer to fix it all.

But here’s the hard truth: the modern contingency fee practice is under siege. In Ontario, injury lawyers face an increasingly brutal cost-benefit environment. The statutory threshold, the deductible, the cap on pain and suffering damages, and the relentless procedural complexity of litigating even a modest case make it nearly impossible to recover meaningful compensation unless the injury is catastrophic or the liability is clear. All of this means that plaintiff lawyers must be ruthless with their time and their resources if they hope to stay in business.

That’s the dilemma. On one hand, we are counsellors and advocates. We want to be accessible, responsive, and empathetic. But on the other hand, when a client with a soft-tissue injury demands weekly phone calls, detailed explanations of each procedural step, and constant reassurance about the progress of their case — even when the prospect of a recovery is slim — something has to give. And more often than not, what gives is the lawyer’s bandwidth for other files, their emotional energy, or their economic viability.

It’s not that these clients don’t matter. Every client matters. But the contingency model does not allow for limitless service delivery. When plaintiff’s counsel takes on a case that might result in a modest $20,000 net recovery after the deductible and disbursements — often years down the road — it becomes professionally and ethically exhausting to invest hundreds of hours navigating the expectations of a client who views their case as life-defining.

The courts have made clear that lawyers must manage their files proactively and avoid delay. But the irony is that these high-maintenance files are sometimes the very reason that other clients are kept waiting. A lawyer bogged down by one disproportionately demanding client may risk missing deadlines, falling behind on correspondence, or neglecting to advance stronger, more deserving cases.

So what’s the solution?

Clear, honest communication is a start. At intake, lawyers should be transparent about the reality of personal injury litigation — the slow pace, the long wait for medical records, the threshold hurdles, and the true meaning of the statutory deductible. Clients need to understand not only the process, but also that counsel’s time is a shared resource across many files. Boundaries can and should be set early.

Some lawyers now use client portals or regular update letters to provide status reports, minimizing the need for repetitive calls or emails. Others assign junior staff to serve as case managers, offering check-ins and emotional support that don’t detract from the lawyer’s time for legal work. But there are limits. When the cost of servicing a file outpaces its value — economically or ethically — lawyers may need to have candid conversations about whether they can continue acting.

At the end of the day, plaintiff lawyers are not just legal technicians. They’re small business owners, managers, and human beings. They owe duties to all their clients — not just the loudest one. And sometimes, protecting the integrity of a practice means saying no to over-servicing a single file at the expense of the rest.

Empathy is essential. But so is sustainability.