Cloaked in secrecy, neither the terms of litigation financing agreements nor the attendant scuffles between financier and claimant, are typically aired in public. That changed for about four months of 2023, during which...more
For the second time in a single litigation (Maslowski v. Prospect Funding Partners, LLC, et al. v. James Schwebel, Esq., et al.), the Minnesota Supreme Court will consider the propriety and permissible scope of private...more
In a unanimous decision, the Minnesota Supreme Court abolished Minnesota’s common-law prohibition against champerty and maintenance, opening Minnesota to third-party litigation financing. Maslowski v. Prospect Funding...more
For many, the term “champerty” might be more readily associated with Monty Python whimsy than sophisticated legal argument. And while champerty is in fact an “ancient legal doctrine” that finds its genesis in medieval...more
Litigation Financing (or Funding) Agreements (“LFAs”), also known as “champerty,” are contracts in which a third party both finances litigation and shares in the proceeds. Nearly half of third-party LFAs pertain to...more
Third-party litigation financing is a topic of increasing interest. The practice has become more common, and federal courts as well as the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board are responding to ensure that the real parties in...more
Last month, this blog provided an overview of litigation funding, and identified a number of issues which we planned to cover over the next several months. This month’s installment focuses on the legality of litigation...more