The second of a series of interviews with top litigators discussing their practice, the evolving legal industry, and litigation finance:
In terms of funding alternatives, the introduction of third party litigation funding really offers an expansion of the contingency model. Lawyers have long been taking cases that have merit, but would not otherwise get to the courtroom, on a contingency basis. But a meritorious case still might not go forward with the traditional contingency option. For some cases the costs (as opposed to legal fees) might be so high that the clients can’t afford to cover even that piece of the litigation—particularly in this digital age when document discovery is often voluminous and discovery costs extensive. And in other instances, a law firm that sees merit in a case might not be able to take it on because of the firm’s own case load or cash flow concerns. The arrival of litigation finance in the market helps pick up these cases and means that a strong claim should never be frustrated just for a plaintiff’s lack of resources.
Read the full story on Above The Law:
There is a growing body of case law across multiple jurisdictions (including those that regularly…
As litigation funding becomes more normalized, the disclosure of litigation funding arrangements is a much…
Recently, I met a General Counsel of a mid-cap company who had only just learned…
Mandatory disclosure of litigation funding has arrived in the District of Delaware — at least…
I recently attended the LITFINCON conference in Houston, Texas. This was my first in-person…
n general, the U.S. legal system requires parties to bear their own costs, and does…