Trending Now

All Articles

3318 Articles
Consumer

Girardi Legal Woes Mount as Records Show $10MM in Debt to Lit Fin Firm

It’s been asserted that lawyer and reality-show-husband Tom Girardi is currently incapable of active participation in his current legal situation. Documents recently filed assert that the firm Girardi Keese owes Virage SPV more than $10 million. Yet Girardi’s brother maintains that the founder of the firm is suffering from memory loss and requires a guardian ad litem for himself and his firm. Law.com details that Girardi Keese and Girardi are personally facing a contempt judgment of over $2 million. This comes after allegations that Girardi failed to remit settlement monies to clients relating to the crash of Lion Air Flight 610. Girardi is in the midst of both personal and business-related bankruptcies, though his brother insists that Tom Girardi is unable to have a reasoned conversation about his situation. Interim trustees have been appointed to oversee both bankruptcies, including active and recently settled cases that could add funds to the bankruptcy estate. These cases include a 2015 gas leak near Los Angeles. Meanwhile, Virage has produced promissory notes to the 2017 and 2018 loans. One loan, for use in the Porter Ranch gas leak action, was cosigned by lawyers Herman Russomanno (real estate lawyer to President Donald Trump and former president of the Florida Bar), and Bruce Mattock–both of whom have chosen not to comment. Their firms were co-counsel in litigation surrounding concussions in the NFL. Girardi has not responded to either bankruptcy petition. As such, Robert Girardi has asked that the deadline be moved to February 12th. Girardi’s attorney, Evan Jenness, has requested a mental evaluation of Girardi, telling the court that he was incapable of answering questions from the judge regarding the whereabouts of money owed to clients. Girardi’s lawyer and brother both maintain that his inability to respond to the accusations against him would be personally and financially detrimental.
Commercial

Parker Law Firm Forced into Arbitration with Litigation Funder by 8th Circuit Court

A recently filed case in the US Court of Appeals 8th Circuit regarding Timothy Parker and Parker Law Firm has been forced into arbitration. Seeking leave to litigate, the appeals court determined that the dispute in question was addressed by the arbitration clause in the formal agreement between parties.

Leagle details that the case in question is one part of a battle over whether Parker Law Firm was obligated to remit payments to litigation funder PS Finance LLC. The disagreement stemmed from Parker Law Firm’s representation of Eureka Woodworks. Eureka sought funding from PS Finance in exchange for proceeds from a claim against BP relating to the Deepwater Horizon spill. As is common in funding contracts, the agreement affirmed that PS Finance would be paid from monies received via settlement, verdict, or ordered judgment. The contract further detailed that any disputes relating to the contract would be subject to binding arbitration. Hence, the court ruling to disallow litigation.

Appellants recovered two payments in 2012 on behalf of Eureka. According to the contract, PS Finance should have received a portion of the payment after legal fees and costs. However, no portion of the payment was given to PS Finance. Parker and the law firm maintain that the money did not come from a settlement, verdict, or judgment and therefore they are not required to transfer any funds over.

In 2019, Parker and Parker Law sought a declaratory judgment affirming that they owed nothing to PS Finance. Parker made allegations that PS Finance breached its contractual obligations when it brought a lawsuit against Parker. The district court dismissed claims against PS Finance.

Arkansas law regarding policy interpretation is firmly on the side of policyholders. It states that when language is ambiguous, courts will construe the policy dictates in favor of the policyholder and against the insurer.

Commercial Consumer

The New Normal: Legal Services Predictions for 2021

For nearly a year, COVID has kept the world in a state of uncertainty. Temporary changes stretch out for months, and no one is sure when things will ‘get back to normal,’ or indeed, what ‘normal’ will look like when that happens. JD Supra has some predictions for the coming year. First, nobody should expect anything like a new normal until at least next fall. While that news may be disheartening, it may not be all bad. Stay-at-home orders led to sweeping upgrades in digital security, video conferencing, document sharing, and other tech advances that are no doubt here to stay. The legal world is likely to make use of these advancements even after in-person meetings resume and courts reopen. It seems that virtual working is here to stay. Review work in particular is moving to virtual spaces. This allows teams to be more nimble and flexible. It also allows teams to form over great distances, giving firms a much wider pool of talent to utilize. Flexible legal talent is expected to remain a viable career path for young legal professionals. Alternative Legal Service Providers (ALSP) refers to a range of services offered at lower price points than traditional legal services. This is an up-and-coming facet of law that is increasingly innovative, as it evolves to better meet the need of a wider array of clients.
Commercial

Antitrust Enforcement—Who Really Wins?

Since the 90s, competition authorities like the European Commission have been getting tougher on Big Tech. Fines have been coming down on tech giants like Apple, Google, Intel, and Microsoft. Some of these cases have resulted in fines in the billions. But who is really benefitting from the success of these? Harbour Litigation Funding explains that authorities are employing creative theories under which to charge Big Tech companies with harm. Antitrust claims or accusations of misused data have led to policy positions intent on limiting the power of tech companies. But how does that help consumers seek justice? What’s important to remember about the fines levied against tech companies is that those who were purportedly damaged aren’t seeing compensation. When consumers sue a company and an award is levied, plaintiffs receive a share as compensation for their losses. When government agencies pursue big tech, consumers generally see nothing. What happens to the billions being levied against these companies? Theoretically, those who were impacted deserve remuneration. In practice, governments generally keep these monies, arguing that payouts eventually reach citizens through social programs and other government spending. Class actions are still the best way for wronged consumers to gain compensation. Without an opt-out class action regime, however, this isn’t always feasible. Increasingly though, UK courts are seeking out more creative approaches that allow consumers proper redress. Litigation funding could be an essential part of this. Ultimately, what’s needed is a combination of a reasonable framework for collective redress, as well as aggressive enforcement of existing laws governing tech companies. Without that, competition authority enforcement is little more than an attempt at soapboxing. It’s essential that there be a reasonable path for wronged consumers to get the compensation they deserve. Some say such changes are coming. But how much longer will consumers have to wait?
Announcements Consumer

Easy Legal Finance Inc. acquires Settlement Lenders Inc.

Easy Legal Finance Inc. a Canadian litigation financing firm, announced today the acquisition of Settlement Lenders Inc. Based in Edmonton, Settlement Lenders Inc. started serving clients in the early 1990s as one of the first firms in the country to offer pre-settlement lending to personal injury plaintiffs. With this announcement, the Easy Legal Group of Companies has acquired the three original and most established litigation lenders in the country, creating an unparalleled portfolio of national brands. "Despite the challenges presented by COVID-19, we remain focused on our goal of strategic growth, through the acquisition of well-established and successful businesses. This acquisition, in addition to Seahold Legal Finance completed last year, demonstrates our continued commitment to servicing this sector," said Larry Herscu, President & CEO of Easy Legal Finance Inc. "Over the past 30 years, we have been providing personal injury plaintiffs with the financial support required, through the legal process," said Tim Latimer, President & CEO of Settlement Lenders. "Easy Legal's reputation for client service is uniquely aligned with ours and I'm pleased to have them further expand our service offering and evolve the firm, for the benefit of our clients and lawyer partners." Mr. Herscu also added that, "The Easy Legal Group of Companies will maintain its mission and remain dedicated to helping those who have been hurt, are in need of financial support, in partnership with the plaintiff bar and its service providers." About the Easy Legal Group of Companies
The Easy Legal Group of Companies is a Canadian litigation financing firm. Its lending solutions service the personal injury sector including plaintiffs with pending injury claims, their legal representatives and the service providers involved in their cases. The firm is registered to conduct business in Ontario, B.C., Alberta, and the Atlantic provinces. Services are delivered through four brands: Easy Legal Finance Inc., Rhino Legal Finance, Seahold Legal Finance and Settlement Lenders. www.easylegal.ca www.rhinofinance.com www.seahold.ca www.settlementlenders.com
Commercial Covid-19

Insolvency Claims in 2021

Given the impact of COVID, insolvencies are on everybody’s mind--how to avoid them or how to navigate them. Knowing what to do when you find yourself in the middle of a business or personal insolvency is crucial. Litigation funding may be one of the most valuable tools in the insolvency toolbox.

Harbour Litigation Funding director Charles Jeffrey has some predictions for 2021. He explains that in the UK, insolvencies were actually down in 2020 despite the ravages of COVID on numerous industries. This is because government assistance has been plentiful. Most programs helping small businesses have been extended through March of this year. After that, things become more unpredictable.

Jeffrey details that businesses in the most danger of insolvency are those that were already struggling. But he stresses that few businesses are pandemic-proof. He also notes that when any business goes under, it has the potential to impact supply chains, creditors, and others that might set off an insolvency chain reaction.

Common claims often pursued in insolvency cases include:

1. Unlawful dividends 2. Undervalued transactions 3. Malfeasance 4. Breach of Duty 5. Wrongful trading

Litigation funding can be a key part of successfully navigating insolvency. Legal costs can add up fast, and insolvent businesses or estates are generally not flush with liquidity. Insolvency practitioners are duty-bound to look into legal funding if funds aren’t available to bring appropriate claims. Jeffrey details that IP’s can assign claims to a funder in exchange for payment upfront. This can be used to cover legal fees and the IP’s fees during the liquidation. Monetizing claims are not allowed in all jurisdictions, but become a valuable financial tool when available.

A conversation with a litigation funder can increase understanding of one’s options during an insolvency situation. Experienced funders will be adept at navigating the process, and explaining one's options in a way that allows one to make informed decisions on how best to proceed.

Commercial

Litigation Finance Provides Peace of Mind in Trade Secrets Cases

As any lawyer will tell you, emotion and litigation are not a good mix. Still, it can be difficult not to feel emotional when a betrayal, theft, or other act of deliberate impropriety leads to trade secrets litigation. Omni Bridgeway explains how a third-party litigation funder can make the litigation process more effective and less disruptive to the business at hand. Experienced funders will be adept at vetting cases in terms of merit, the likelihood of success, and the process that will be needed to ensure that any awards will be collected. Funders can also advise on strategy—though final decisions are always left to clients and their legal teams. Because funders look at cases as investment opportunities, they’re more adept at seeing the facts objectively. The due diligence conducted by potential funders can increase client understanding of the potential pitfalls of the case. Trade secrets cases are among the most complex cases to litigate. The increase in digital information and remote work means that data is more vulnerable than ever. Having an established funding firm on your side provides more than funds—it provides a wealth of knowledge and sophistication that only comes from experience. Trade secrets cases can lead to huge awards, with some recent cases reaching into the nine figures. Cases may also move to federal courts in some circumstances, owing to the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act. This 2016 law encourages filing trade secrets cases in federal district courts. If pursuing trade secrets legislation is in keeping with the business objectives of your company, having experienced third-party funders in your corner is a savvy move.
Commercial

Liability Rates See Major Increases

Some say Litigation Finance is partly to blame for the latest round of insurance rate increases. Many speculate that an increase in the number of cases and award sizes have led to significant rate hikes. Business Insurance details that auto liability rates climbed about 11%, and general liability went up 6%. Excess liability, however, saw a staggering rate hike of between 50-160%. Some businesses that saw rate increases last year believed they’d be immune in 2021. Not so. Some policyholders who saw huge rate increases last year are still enduring 10-20% rate hikes this year. In addition to the raising of rates, policies are more likely to include exclusions related to infectious disease. This obvious response to COVID means policyholders may not even be getting the protection they’re paying for. This is one of many factors that has led to the purchase of less coverage overall. As policyholders deal with increased risk or losses, they face the possibility of being dropped by their incumbent insurers, leaving them without affordable options. Why is Litigation Finance being touted as a reason for higher insurance rates? Third-party legal funding has been an instrumental part of class action cases for over a decade. Its influence continues to grow, as legal professionals come to appreciate its value. By increasing access to justice for those who can afford it least, litigation funding also increases accountability among insurers who may now have their feet held to the proverbial fire. Perhaps in addition to raising rates, insurers can do more to ensure that their conduct doesn’t inspire a need for class actions. Negating the need to pursue litigation may be the best way to avoid paying a judgment.
Commercial

Hausfeld Adds Two New Partners to Roster

Two London-based lawyers have been promoted to Partner at specialist litigation firm, Hausfeld. These promotions echo the number of partnership elevations from the previous year. Hausfeld has added a litigation funding arm to its operation, making it one of a growing number of law firms that has done so. Global Legal Post details that Lucy Rigby specializes in collective redress, and had been promoted to counsel last year. Luke Streatfield is currently involved in the first class action claim under the Consumer Rights Act. He is a competition litigation specialist. Global vice-chair for Hausfeld, Anthony Maton, affirms that while Hausfeld has had a challenging 2020, the firm is pleased to recognize and elevate exceptional talent. The London team has been busy, filing four UK collective actions in the past year. These appointments bring Hausfeld’s partner number to 18, 45% of whom are women.