Forget cryptocurrency—there is another kind of investment making the news in recent years, and it is one creating some major headaches for both plaintiffs and defendants in the legal world. Plaintiff investment funding, also known as litigation funding, is a practice where third-party lenders provide financial support to plaintiffs in exchange for a portion of the settlement or judgment. This type of funding has gained popularity as a way to level the playing field in legal battles, especially against well-funded opponents.
Third-party lenders can help pay plaintiffs' legal fees when pursuing claims against insurers and other deep-pocketed defendants. This financial support can make it possible for individuals or small businesses to take on complex and costly litigation that they might not be able to afford on their own. However, critics argue that this practice can lead to frivolous lawsuits and conflicts of interest between the plaintiff and the funder.
These increased costs have an impact on federal, state, and local governments — and on insurance carriers and policyholders. As litigation funding becomes more prevalent, it is changing the dynamics of legal proceedings and raising questions about ethics and transparency in the legal industry. Some argue that this practice can help underprivileged individuals seek justice, while others worry about the potential for abuse and manipulation.
Welcome back to the Big Law Business column. I'm Roy Strom, and today we look at how one law professor sees litigation funding evolving in the coming years. With the rise of class action lawsuits and mass torts, the demand for plaintiff investment funding is only expected to grow. This trend has implications for the legal profession, as well as for the broader financial industry.
In one of the first decisions evaluating fiduciary liability under new ERISA rules relating to ESG investments, a Texas district court has set a precedent for how investment decisions in retirement plans are made. The case highlights the importance of transparency and accountability in the management of funds, especially when third-party lenders are involved in the process.
A class action complaint brought against American, Fidelity, and Edelman Financial Engines targets ESG 401(k) investments, alleging that these companies failed to act in the best interests of their clients. This case underscores the growing scrutiny of investment practices and the need for greater oversight in the financial services industry.
The plaintiffs include a subway train operator, a teacher, and an occupational therapist in the city's school system, highlighting the diverse range of individuals who may seek funding for their legal claims. As more people become aware of the availability of plaintiff investment funding, the number of cases involving third-party lenders is likely to increase in the future.
Ever heard of litigation funding? It's a relatively new, multibillion-dollar industry where investors fund lawsuits. Here's the idea: say you've been wronged by a big corporation but can't afford the legal fees to take them to court. A litigation funder steps in, pays your legal costs, and in return, takes a percentage of your winnings if you win the case. It's a high-risk, high-reward business that is reshaping the legal landscape.
A pitched battle between proponents and opponents of third-party litigation financing (TPLF) has entered a new phase, as the practice becomes more widespread and controversial. While some see litigation funding as a way to provide access to justice for those who would otherwise be unable to afford legal representation, others caution against the potential conflicts of interest and ethical concerns that can arise from this type of financial arrangement.
