Trending Now

All Articles

3374 Articles
Commercial

Should Litigation Funders Worry About Kirkland’s Push into Contingency-Fee Litigation?

Recently, law firm Kirkland & Ellis announced a ten-fold increase in investment dollars towards contingency-fee plaintiff-side claims. Alternative fee arrangements have been the most profitable component of the law firm thus far, so management figures 'why not roll the dice' on what's already been working? The question now is: is Kirkland's approach a harbinger of things to come? And if so, how will this impact litigation funders down the road? As reported in Big Law Business, litigation funders have long provided a platform for traditionally risk averse law firms to expose themselves to more risk. While this has turned funding into an extremely profitable industry, it has also created a bit of a double-edged sword. After all, if big law firms like Kirkland start taking on more risk, what do they need litigation funders for? Longford Capital co-founder Michael Nicolas notes this concern, but insists we're not anywhere near a tipping point at the moment. He points out that Kirkland made headlines with its announcement precisely because its decision is so unique. If other big law firms were doing what Kirkland is doing, no one would have batted an eye. The argument essentially is that Big Law is slow to change, and there are still major gaps in the market; namely, the skyrocketing cost of lawsuits which restricts access to justice. As long as those gaps exist, funders have a place at the table. Of course, as Nicolas further notes, in a fully-efficient market, Big Law would actually be competing with litigation funders. They have the money and manpower to adopt the added risk of contingency-fee claims, as Kirkland is now doing. Which means that by exposing Big Law to outsized risk (and the outsized returns that come with it), litigation funders may in fact be breeding their eventual competitors.
Announcements Consumer

Legal-Bay Pre Settlement Funding Preparing For Numerous Bayer Lawsuits

JERSEY CITY, N.J., July 22, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- Legal-Bay LLC, The Pre Settlement Funding Company, announced today that they have recently seen an increase in Essure birth control lawsuits, and are preparing for numerous presettlement payouts in the coming months.

The Essure brand birth control device is put out by Bayer, who is accused of knowingly distributing a faulty product. More than 17,000 plaintiffs have claimed serious pain and suffering from broken devices including device migration and perforated organs. Bayer continues to deny any wrongdoing and stands by the safety of its product, with all intentions of defending itself against the many lawsuits already filed, and the many more sure to come.

In spite of past dismissals, California, Illinois, and Pennsylvania courts are currently selecting bellwether trial cases and setting court dates. The largest number of pending cases is in California, and their courts have compiled the largest collection of documents and information regarding the Essure devices. California and Pennsylvania are looking to try their cases sometime in 2019, while Illinois courts have already set a trial date, albeit not until 2020.

Chris Janish, CEO of Legal-Bay commented, "Legal-Bay has seen an increase in the filings for Bayer's Essure device. While there are no settlements or jury verdicts in these lawsuits, we nevertheless remain committed to assisting plaintiffs with their presettlement cash advance needs."

If you are involved in an Essure birth control lawsuit and are looking for presettlement cash now, you can fill out an application at: http://lawsuitssettlementfunding.com

Legal-Bay is a leading personal injury pre-settlement advocate, and works directly with many of the top mass tort law firms to provide the best pre-settlement cash advance rates in the industry in as little as 24 – 48 hours. If you do not have an attorney, Legal-Bay can assist you with retaining a top lawyer or law firm that specializes in Essure cases.

All of Legal-Bay funding programs are risk-free as you only repay the advance if your case is successful. The non-recourse advance is not a lawsuit loan, lawsuit loans, pre settlement loan, or pre-settlement loans.

Please apply online at:  http://lawsuitssettlementfunding.com or call the company's toll free hotline at: 877.571.0405 where agents are standing by.

Source:  Legal-Bay LLC

Commercial

How Dividex Packaged a Pair of Danish Class Actions for Litigation Funding

Dividex, the international securities class action broker and case manager, wanted in on a Novo Nordisk class action after the stock shed over $50B in the wake of fraud allegations. The only problem? No litigation funders would bite, given that the Danish Pharma company would have to face the scales of justice on its home turf (international securities actions can no longer be tried in the U.S., pursuant to a 2010 Supreme Court decision). And since funding is needed to get an international securities action off the ground, the deal was dead in the water. Until, that is, Dividex packaged the deal into its own version of a portfolio funding arrangement. As reported in Institutional Investor, Dividex is run by Irwin Schwartz, an attorney who founded law firm BLA Schwartz. Schwartz formed Dividex in 2013 after recognizing a gap in the market - international securities actions cost money to get moving, and funders don't typically have the time or means to source deals themselves (sourcing requires investigating precipitous stock drops and tying those to corporate malfeasance). Hence, Dividex acts a broker and case manager. Schwartz wanted the Novo Nordisk deal, so he bundled it with another high profile Danish securities claim - the Danske bank case (the banks was accused of facilitating Russian money laundering). Schwartz wrangled two of the nation's largest pensions - CalSTRS and the Teacher Retirement System of Texas into the portfolio funding deal. He also secured funding from IMF Bentham, which agreed to accept a fee structure based on the losses of all institutions who participate in the deal (as opposed to a straight back-end percentage or investment multiple). This is the first known case of U.S. institutions grouping together to partner with funders on an international case. Now that Schwartz has broken the mold, expect more examples to follow suit.
Announcements Consumer

Legal-Bay Pre Settlement Funding Focusing On IVC Filter Cases

JERSEY CITY, N.J., July 17, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- Legal-Bay LLC, The Pre Settlement Funding Company, announced today that they continue to see a large volume of IVC filter patients needing cash advances. Top IVC filter manufacturers have recently lost bellwether trials, and Legal-Bay believes this could signal a shift toward settling pending cases within the upcoming months. IVC filters are devices which inhibit blood clots in patients, preventing pulmonary embolisms. 80% of the filters sold are put out by C.R. Bard and Cook, and juries in recent litigation are finding that many of these devices are proving defective. Plaintiffs claim they are dealing with perforations, shifting after implantation, filter fractures, and general ineffectiveness. Cook specifically has already lost a major trial when an Indianapolis jury awarded $3 million to a woman who suffered a cardiac injury from her faulty IVC filter. And with mass tort filings in Florida, Pennsylvania, and California state courts, many more bellwether trials are slated to occur. *As of June 2019, there have been over 9,000 IVC cases filed nationwide.  Chris Janish, CEO of Legal-Bay, commented, "We are seeing a lot of applications regarding IVC plaintiffs needing lawsuit cash as trials with Bard and Cook loom closer. To date, no settlements have occurred and there are no assurances that Bard or Cook will settle their claims or for what values. Regardless, we continue to aid plaintiffs who've suffered injuries from these devices." If you are involved in an IVC lawsuit and are looking for a pre-settlement cash advance now before your case settles, you can fill out an application form at the company's website: http://lawsuitssettlementfunding.com Legal-Bay is a leading personal injury pre-settlement advocate, and works directly with many of the top mass tort law firms to provide the best pre-settlement cash advance rates in the industry in as little as 24-48 hours.  They urge people who have not yet contacted a lawyer to reach out now; Legal-Bay can assist you with retaining a top IVC lawyer or law firm that works with clients who need funding. All of Legal-Bay's funding programs are risk-free as you only repay the advance if your case is successful. Please apply online at: http://lawsuitssettlementfunding.com or call: 877.571.0405
Announcements Commercial

Canadian Innovator JL Energy Transportation Inc. Successfully Defends Patent Challenge From Major Canada/US Pipeline and Gas Processing Companies

CALGARY, July 17, 2019 /CNW/ - JL Energy Transportation Inc. ("JETI", more: www.jlenergy.com) announces that it has successfully defended a Federal Court challenge to its gas transportation patent, with the Court confirming the validity of its key patent terms. This endorsement clears the way for JETI's continuation of its license and patent infringement claims against an alliance of major Canadian and US pipeline and gas processing companies. The defendant companies currently include: Alliance Pipeline Limited Partnership, Alliance Pipeline Ltd., Alliance Pipeline L.P., Alliance Pipeline Inc., (collectively, "Alliance"), Aux Sable Liquid Products LP (formerly known as Alliance Pipeline NGL, LP) and Aux Sable Liquid Products Inc. (formerly known as Alliance Pipeline NGL Inc.)(together, "Aux Sable").  As previously announced on March 6, 2019, JETI is claiming significant damages as a result of Alliance's and Aux Sable's alleged infringements of JETI's licences and intellectual property rights. Background In the early 1990s a team led by John Lagadin, the founder of JETI, invented a novel and innovative method for more efficiently and cost-effectively transporting enriched natural gas via a single pipeline carrying both natural gas and natural gas liquids ("NGLs") from the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin to the lucrative US mid-western natural gas and NGL market. It was a ground-breaking invention that caught the eye of 22 producers, including some of North America's largest energy companies. These companies subsequently formed the "Alliance Pipeline" which went into service December 1, 2000. JETI licensed the technology (subsequently patented in a number of jurisdictions around the world) to the Alliance and Aux Sable companies, who between 1996 and 2000 planned and constructed a 3,848 km pipeline from BC and Alberta to Chicago as part of an integrated energy system to export Western Canadian enriched natural gas to be processed at the US market hub in a world class processing facility.  The Alliance Pipeline was one of the most significant infrastructure projects in North America at the time. It has since delivered an average of 1.6 billion cubic feet of enriched gas every day to the Chicago market (more than 1/5th of Canada's natural gas exports). This major success story of Canadian innovation, built on the entrepreneurialism of the JETI team, has provided Canada access to a valuable export market and contributed billions of dollars to Canada's GDP and Alberta's royalty revenues. Proceedings JETI alleges in Alberta Court of Queen's Bench Court File No. 1601-06322 that Alliance and Aux Sablehave in recent years used its proprietary and patented technology to transport and process rich natural gas on additional pipelines in British Columbia, Alberta and North Dakota without licence or authorization. Aux Sable subsequently challenged of one of JETI's patents in Federal Court File No. T-1612-16. The Federal Court invalidated claims 9 and 10, but decided that all of claims 1 through 8 of the patent are valid, being the key elements of the technology upon which the Alliance / Aux Sablesystem is built and continues to operate. As previously announced, Bentham IMF Capital Limited ("Bentham"), the Canadian arm of leading global litigation funder IMF Bentham (ASX:IMF) is funding JETI's actions against Alliance and Aux Sable. JETI is represented by MLT Aikins LLP. John Lagadin, President of JETI, said: "We are very pleased to have the Federal Court validate the key claims in our patent. This endorsement allows us to continue our already lengthy quest for justice, and we look forward to a successful outcome once the courts have been presented with the facts in the case. We remain appreciative to have Bentham on board to successfully defend our patent and fund our continuing actions as their significant due diligence, capital at risk, and proven track record, validates our confidence in our long standing claims." About the Defendants The Alliance Pipeline system consists of an approximately 3,848-kilometre (2,391-mile) integrated Canadian and US natural gas transmission pipeline system, delivering rich natural gas from the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin and the Williston Basin to the Chicago market hub. The Alliance system delivers, on average, about 45.3 million standard cubic metres (or 1.6 billion standard cubic feet) of natural gas per day. More: www.alliancepipeline.com. Alliance Pipeline Limited Partnership (Alliance Canada) owns the Canadian portion of the Alliance Pipeline system. Alliance Pipeline L.P. (Alliance U.S.A.) owns the U.S. portion of the Alliance Pipeline system. Alliance is represented by Rose LLP. Aux Sable commenced operation as part of the Alliance Pipeline and Aux Sable dense phase gas system. At that time, two companies were established, one in the United States, and one in Canada, to manage the natural gas liquids business associated with the Alliance Pipeline. In 2010, a second U.S. company, Aux Sable Midstream (ASM) was established to focus on other midstream developments in the United States. Aux Sable owns and operates a world-scale natural gas liquids extraction and fractionation facility in Illinois near the terminus of the Alliance Pipeline. The facility is currently capable of processing 2.1 billion cubic feet per day of natural gas and can produce approximately 107,000 barrels per day of specification natural gas liquid products. Aux Sable's rich gas premiums provide market access to rich gas producers in Canada and the U.S. that cannot be realized through conventional field extraction and local NGL sales. Aux Sable is represented by McCarthy Tetrault LLP. About Bentham IMF Bentham IMF Capital Limited is the Canadian arm of IMF Bentham Limited (ASX: IMF), one of the leading global litigation & dispute financiers, headquartered in Australia and with offices in Canada, the US, Singapore, Hong Kong and London. IMF has built its reputation as a trusted provider of innovative litigation funding solutions and has established an increasingly diverse portfolio of litigation & dispute financing assets. IMF has been a leading pioneer of litigation financing in Australia since 2001, playing a significant role in the initial steps towards a globalized industry via its international expansion in Canada, the US, Asia and Europe.  IMF has a highly experienced litigation funding team overseeing its investments delivering a 90% success rate across 179 completed cases (at 30 September 2018). More: www.benthamimf.ca. SOURCE JL Energy Transportation Inc.
Commercial

The Perils of Crowdfunding Litigation

GoFundMe recently cancelled an Australian rugby player's crowdfunded legal campaign, and the story made international headlines. Now some experts are scrutinizing the ethical and practical concerns of crowdfunding litigation; some of which will sound very familiar to litigation funders, yet others are unique to the crowdfunding niche. According to the Australasian Lawyer, the underlying case involves ex-rugby player Israel Folau, who was fired from Rugby Australia in May after making anti-LGBT remarks. Folau turned to crowdfunding website GoFundMe to fund his legal campaign, only to have the site cancel his campaign on the grounds that his remarks violate their anti-discrimination policies. The case has made both national and international headlines, and has brought crowdfunding legal campaigns into the public spotlight, and raised all sorts of ethical concerns. Chief among them are issues of disclosure and privilege - two subjects very familiar to litigation funders. But there are unique concerns relating to crowdfunding. For one, when crowdfunding a legal campaign, claimants do not know who they are accepting money from. This naturally poses ethical concerns as law firms receive payment from unknown parties (not an issue where litigation funding is concerned). Another concern is whether the crowdfunded campaign waives privilege. Privilege battles have been waged in regard to litigation funding, but funders are sophisticated entities who often consult and advise the claimant's legal team - crowdfunders are not. This creates a potential dilemma and could prompt discovery motions by defense on the grounds that privilege has been waived. The Law Council of Australia is exploring the issue of crowdfunding and considering a regulatory framework. Other jurisdictions may soon follow suit. Courts may also jump into the fray, taking crowdfunding into account when issuing security for costs, for example. Just like litigation funding, the growth of crowdfunding's popularity is spurring calls for greater regulation.
Announcements Commercial

BroadRiver Welcomes Emma Dickson as General Counsel and Chief Compliance Officer

NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- BroadRiver Asset Management, L.P., a New York based manager of alternative assets announced today that Emma Dickson has joined the firm as General Counsel and Chief Compliance Officer and a key member of the firm’s management team.

“Legal excellence and outstanding compliance have been hallmarks of our firm since its inception,” said Philip Siller, Co-CEO of BroadRiver Asset Management. “Emma brings to BroadRiver years of diverse experience supervising investment funds and leading compliance teams, both in-house and at leading law firms. We look forward to working with her in building our offerings and providing exceptional service to our clients.”

Ms. Dickson was most recently Counsel to the Investment Funds Group at the Akin Gump office in London, UK. From 2014 to 2017, she was General Counsel at Criterion Capital Management, LLC, a San Francisco-based investment adviser. Prior to joining Criterion in 2014, she worked as an Attorney for Man Investments, focusing on fund launches, securities regulation issues, and general corporate counsel functions. Prior to joining Man in 2008, Ms. Dickson was an associate in the Investment Management Group at Schulte Roth & Zabel, LLP, where she handled a variety of legal issues related to alternative investment funds.

Ms. Dickson received a B.A. in History from Columbia University and a JD/MBA from Georgetown University Law Center & McDonough School of Business.

BroadRiver, which closed on its third longevity fund in September of 2018, seeks to provide clients with exposure to assets that have compelling risk-adjusted returns, low volatility, and negligible correlation to financial markets. BroadRiver’s highly selective approach to asset selection is underpinned by proprietary analytics and a deep commitment to research, resulting in carefully structured portfolios with strong, predictable cash flows.

Ms. Dickson’s focus will be to add her legal proficiency to the firm’s expertise in structuring and managing the firm’s new and existing funds in a range of non-correlated asset classes. The new strategies include exposure to litigation finance, global trade receivables, and other uncorrelated income assets. She will complement BroadRiver’s management team, positioning the firm to add to its $1.4 billion in assets under management.

About BroadRiver Asset Management

With assets under management of $1.4 billion, the firm focuses on alternative investment management strategies involving non-capital markets assets. It boasts one of the deepest and longest-tenured longevity-risk investment teams, having served institutional clients for almost twenty years.

For more information, please visit www.broadrivercap.com.

Commercial

$4 Billion Therium-Funded Google Class Action Sees Light of Day in UK Court of Appeal

After being tossed out by the High Court, the $4 billion Therium-funded Google class action has reached the UK Court of Appeals. The lead applicant, Richard Lloyd - a former consumer rights organization director - is claiming Google owes 4.4 million Brits hundreds of pounds each for its nefarious 'Safari Workaround' software, which was allegedly used to spy on iPhone users. As reported in The Register, the claim covers all UK citizens who used Safari's browser on their iPhone between June 2011 and February 2012. During that time, the suit alleges, Google tricked Safari into installing a cookie on its browser that allowed the Tech giant to snoop on users as they browsed the internet. This is in direct violation of the Data Protection Act  of 1998. Google has already paid extremely modest fines (less than $50MM) to US regulators over the Safari Workaround scandal. But Lloyd and Therium are attempting to bring a US-style class action (technically a representative action, since the UK does not do class actions) which aims to secure billions of pounds for millions of UK citizens. Therium will collect up to 50% of any payout, and is allegedly paying Lloyd a salary of £50k for up to four years to act as frontman for the claim. A High Court ruling last year squashed the case before it had a chance to even get going. Now, in the Court of Appeal, Lloyd and Therium are hoping to jumpstart their multibillion-pound claim.
Commercial

Domino’s Could Be on the Hook for AUD $100MM in Therium-Funded Class Action

Law firm Phi Finney McDonald and litigation funder Therium Capital Management are filing a class action which alleges that Domino's underpaid delivery drivers and in-store workers. Estimates put the total claim amount around AUD $100MM. As reported in Livewire Markets, the action is being brought on behalf of employees at Domino's franchises between June 2013 and January 2018. The suit to recapture the difference between the company's enterprise bargaining agreement (EBA) and the amount workers would have been compensated has no EBA been in effect. Domino's total savings under its EBA agreement is around $200MM, and it has been roughly estimated that half of its franchisees are covered under the claim - therefore the total claim amount has a rough estimate of AUD $100MM. So far, only 1,000 workers have signed up for the class action, which means any payout would be far less than the above amount. That said, Phi Finney and Therium are actively courting more claimants. Domino's insists its EBA was still valid through January of 2018, and therefore intends to vigorously defend itself in court. The company's EBA expired in June of 2013, yet no subsequent agreement was put into place. Therefore, the company will argue that its EBA remained in effect (even though it expired). Domino's stock took a brief hit on news of the action, but has quickly recovered.