Trending Now

John Freund's Posts

3272 Articles
Case Developments Commercial

Discovery Application Filed by Russian Billionaire Over Litigation Funding

By Harry Moran and 4 others |

The sanctioning of Russian business owners since 2022 has led to a plethora of litigation, as one ongoing case in Florida sees two Russian nationals in a dispute over the funding of litigation between them.

Reporting by Bloomberg Law covers ongoing proceedings in a Florida court, where sanctioned Russian billionaire Andrey Guriev is seeking discovery on the funding of claims brought against him by Alexander Gorbachev. The discovery application relates to a series of cases brought against Guriev by Gorbachev over his claimed partial ownership of Guriev’s company, with Gorbachev’s legal costs, insurance and additional expenses having been paid by Sphinx Funding LLC, a subsidiary of 777 Partners. 

Gorbachev failed in his claim brought against Guriev in the UK, but has since claimed that he does not have the £12 million that he has been ordered to pay to Guriev in court costs. Mr Guriev’s counsel from Boies Schiller Flexner, explained the reasoning behind the discovery application in a memorandum of law, stating:

“Mr. Guriev hopes to discover information relevant to the identities and ultimate sources of the funds provided by the third-party funders who financed Mr. Gorbachev’s failed, frivolous, and potentially fraudulent claims, as well as the true motives and objectives in bringing those claims.”

In response to a prior application by Guriev to have the two funders added as parties to the case, Joshua Wander, managing partner and co-founder of 777 Partners, stated that even though the company had covered some of Gorbachev’s legal costs, it had no stake in the result of the litigation. Furthermore, Wander had claimed that his companies had no paid any of Gorbachev’s legal costs after May 2023, following a “breakdown in the relationship between Alexander and the funders”.

Case Developments Commercial

£16m Settlement Reached in Dispute Between Funder and Investor’s Estate

By Harry Moran and 4 others |

The funding of arbitration claims brought against nation states represent challenging opportunities for legal funders, with the potential of a large return balanced against the complicated nature and prolonged timelines of these disputes. A new settlement in the High Court demonstrates that these issues can even extend to disputes between the claimant and funder, even when a valuable settlement is secured.

Reporting by the USA Herald covers the move by the High Court of Justice of England and Wales to finalise the settlement in a dispute between litigation funder Buttonwood Legal Capital, and the estate of late Finnish mining investor Mohamed Abdel Raouf Bahgat. The £16.74 million settlement which was approved by the court on Tuesday ended the legal action that Buttonwood began in 2022 to recover a share of the award won in Bahgat’s arbitration case against Egypt.

As Mr Bahgat died on 8 October 2022, the settlement was reached with his estate. The arbitration claim dated back to 2000 when Bahgat was arrested by the new government and had his assets frozen and his mining operations project seized. The arbitration ended in 2019 at a tribunal in The Hague where Bahgat was awarded $43.8 million, which following two years of interest and an enforcement dispute, finished as a $99.5 million payout in November 2021. Buttonwood brought a claim to the High Court in the following year to retrieve its share of the amount, further complicated by a prior renegotiation of terms between Buttonwood and Bahgat in 2017.

Neither Buttonwood Legal nor the Estate of Mr Bahgat have publicly commented on the settlement.

Commercial Regulatory Issues

LSB Director Argues Funding Should Move to a “Mandatory Model” of Regulation

By Harry Moran and 4 others |

With next Monday set as the deadline for the Civil Justice Council’s (CJC) Interim Report and Consultation on litigation funding, we are beginning to hear more vocal arguments about the approach the government should take towards regulating the litigation funding industry.

An article in Legal Futures provides an overview of remarks given by Richard Orpin, Director, Regulation & Policy at Legal Services Board, at a consultation event for the CJC review in Oxford. In his speech, Orpin advocated for “moving away from the voluntary model of regulation to a mandatory model” for litigation funding, suggesting that it should be brought “into the remit of the FCA (Financial Conduct Authority).

Orpin argued that the rise in the use of litigation funding had “coincided with an increase in poor practice by some law firms in receipt of that funding,” and that “this pattern of behaviour undermines trust confidence in the ‘no win, no fee’ sector.” Orpin put forward the view that regulators needed to take a “more proactive” stance, highlighting his organisation’s concerns over “poor standards of client care, short-term financial gain being put above the interests of client and duty to the court.”

Other speakers at the event varied in their perspectives, with Richard Blann, head of litigation and conduct investigations at Lloyds Banking Group, similarly arguing that the current model of self-regulation was “ineffective and inadequate” and that the Association of Litigation Funders (ALF) “has no teeth”. 

Adrian Chopin, managing director and founder of Bench Walk Advisers, offered a dissenting view and questioned some of the preconceptions about funding, saying that the suggestion there are “waterfalls where the funders take everything and the client gets nothing” demonstrated a “gross level of ignorance”.

Community Spotlights

Community Spotlight:  Maz Ghorban, President, Rockpoint Legal Funding

By John Freund and 4 others |

As President of Rockpoint Legal Funding, Maz Ghorban brings over 25 years of leadership experience spanning the legal services, call center, and software industries. With a proven track record of scaling private and public companies, Maz drives Rockpoint’s mission to empower plaintiffs by providing critical funding, accessible medical treatment, and operational efficiencies for law firms.

Based in Los Angeles, Maz oversees Rockpoint’s innovative offerings, which include pre-settlement and post-settlement funding, plaintiff and litigation funding, and medical lien purchases. He is also leading the launch of Rockpoint Probate Funding, a groundbreaking initiative aimed at providing financial relief to beneficiaries and executors navigating the complex probate process. This service enables heirs to access funds for urgent expenses such as medical bills, funeral costs, and daily living needs, bridging the gap during inheritance delays.

Before joining Rockpoint, Maz served as Executive Vice President and Business Unit CEO at Alert Communications, where he enhanced operational efficiencies for law firms nationwide by leading the largest legal-only intake call center in the United States. Prior to that, he was Vice President of Global Services at AbacusNext (now Caret), a premier provider of practice management solutions for law and accounting firms. His leadership roles also include serving as Vice President of Corporate Strategy and M&A at OnSolve, a leader in emergency mass notification solutions.

Earlier in his career, Maz held senior management roles at West Corporation and Raindance, where he focused on post-sale operations and corporate strategy. As Senior Vice President of Corporate Strategy at MIR3, he spearheaded mergers and acquisitions, including the successful sale of the company to Veritas Capital. With a comprehensive understanding of the legal services lifecycle, Maz has dedicated two decades to supporting plaintiff and defense firms with case acquisition, case management, IT/technology solutions, and firm operations.

A recognized thought leader in the legal and financial services industries, Maz frequently shares his expertise on topics such as litigation funding, corporate strategy, and operational excellence. Outside of his professional endeavors, Maz is a passionate Pittsburgh Steelers fan who enjoys teaching boxing, playing musical instruments, and spending quality time with his family.

Under Maz’s leadership, Rockpoint Legal Funding continues to set industry benchmarks for innovation, excellence, and client satisfaction. His strategic vision and unwavering commitment position the company as a trusted partner for plaintiffs, law firms, and beneficiaries seeking comprehensive financial solutions in the legal sector.

Company Name and Description:  Rockpoint Legal Funding provides tailored financial solutions for plaintiffs and law firms, offering critical funding to individuals involved in litigation, including personal injury and employment cases. By bridging financial gaps during the legal process, Rockpoint empowers plaintiffs to access necessary medical care and living expenses while helping law firms streamline operations and maximize case outcomes.

Company Website: https://rockpointlegalfunding.com/

Year Founded: 2015

Headquarters:  Serving clients across the United States, with a strong presence and specialized focus in California.

Area of Focus: When individuals face financial challenges during the litigation process, Rockpoint Legal Funding provides essential solutions to bridge the gap. By offering pre-settlement and post-settlement funding, as well as medical lien purchasing, Rockpoint enables plaintiffs to access necessary medical care and cover living expenses without the financial strain.

Law firms also benefit from Rockpoint’s tailored funding solutions, which streamline operations and improve case outcomes. With a commitment to empowering plaintiffs and supporting legal professionals, Rockpoint Legal Funding plays a vital role in facilitating access to justice while driving efficiency and innovation in the legal funding industry.

Rockpoint continues to expand its impact through initiatives like Rockpoint Probate Funding, addressing financial needs during the complex probate process. For more information, visit Rockpoint Legal Funding.

Member Quote: "Don’t count the days, make the days count." - Muhammad Ali

Commercial Regulatory Issues

Arizona Senate Committee Approves Litigation Funding Disclosure Bill

By Harry Moran and 4 others |

The fight over the future of regulation for third-party litigation funding continues to see a plethora of activity at the state level in the U.S., as last week a bill in the Arizona legislature moved one step closer to becoming law and imposing new restrictions on legal funding.

Reporting by Chamber Business News covers the move by the Arizona Senate’s Regulatory Affairs & Government Efficiency Committee to approve a bill governing transparency in litigation funding in the state. Senate Bill 1215 passed the committee with a majority vote, with four members voting for its advancement, two votes against and one ‘not voting’. 

The bill, which was sponsored by Senator Vince Leach, shares similarities with similar legislation put forward in other states by introducing new rules governing the disclosure of third-party funding in civil claims. The bill requires the disclosure of litigation funding agreements to all parties in the action, prohibits the funder from receiving a larger share of the proceeds than the claimants, and restricts the influence a funder may have on litigation decisions including choosing counsel, expert witnesses or the direction of litigation strategy.

The bill is supported by the Arizona Chamber of Commerce & Industry, the Arizona Manufacturers Council, the Arizona Lodging & Tourism Association, and the Arizona Trucking Association. Organisations opposing the bill include the Arizona Trial Lawyers Association and the International Legal Finance Association.

The full text of SB 1215, as well as information on the passage of the bill, can be found on the LegiScan website.

Case Developments Commercial

Legal Professionals Offer Differing Views on the CAT’s Approval of £200m Mastercard Settlement

By Harry Moran and 4 others |

As LFJ reported earlier this week, the news that the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) had approved the £200 million settlement for the Mastercard class action provided a landmark ruling that will no doubt be seen as an important moment for legal funding in 2025.

An article in The Global Legal Post reflects on the impact of the CAT ruling, garnering views from senior professionals across the legal industry as to the merits of the tribunal’s decision and the impact it may have on similar cases moving forward.

Leslie Perrin, chair of Calunius Capital and former chairman of the Association of Litigation Funders, provided the funder’s perspective and said that “there has to be hope that Merricks’ settlement with Mastercard is not a blueprint for other cases”. Perrin also expressed concern that the CAT’s decision “will no doubt encourage other defendants”, and lamented that “the funder’s intervention to challenge the settlement has been unjustly criticised”.

Charles Balmain, partner at White & Case, noted that the speed with which the CAT approved the settlement “suggests that the tribunal had no hesitation in concluding that the settlement struck was just and reasonable.” Furthermore, Balmain highlighted that this decision serves as a useful reminder as to the gulf between the “eye-watering” value of claims put forward when they are first brought and the “the true value” that is returned at the end of these prolonged proceedings.

Louise Trayhurn, co-founder of Crescient, a corporate advisory boutique that specialises in litigation risk, also highlighted the extended duration of such cases and argued that it is “a shame for the parties and courts (but not the lawyers) that it cost almost £90m to get that result”. Trayhurn also placed this case in the wider context of the legal funding market that supports these claims, explaining that “funders are vital in bringing these cases and holding corporate behaviour to account, but they have limited ability to affect settlement”.

Case Developments Commercial

Woodsford Funding Australian Class Action Targeting Tesla

By Harry Moran and 4 others |

Although Elon Musk’s name has become most prominent in stories about U.S. politics over recent months, in Australia, it Tesla that has attracted the attention of a new lawsuit alleging that it has marketed and sold vehicles that are defective.

An article in ICLG covers the launch of a new class action being brought against Tesla over allegations that the car manufacturer’s semi-autonomous driving system has put drivers at risk through its ‘phantom breaking’ phenomenon. Furthermore, the class action is targeting Tesla’s marketing of its vehicles, alleging that the company has mislead customers over the supposed range of its vehicles. The class action was filed by JGA Saddler and is being funded by Woodsford.

Rebecca Jancauskas, director of JGA Saddler, took aim at Tesla’s “so-called Autopilot” feature, arguing that the vehicles’ habit of applying the brakes at random “could, if it causes an accident, result in serious injury and/or death.” Jancauskas also painted the alleged false advertising of Tesla vehicles’ range as part of a wider picture of misleading behaviour from the car company, saying that she “hoped this claim underscores the importance for all EV manufacturers to be truthful in their marketing, deliver on their promises, and ensure their products are safe and reliable.”

David Haughan, investment officer at Woodsford, argued that Australian consumers who purchased Tesla vehicles “were sold a car based on promises about the vehicles’ self-driving capabilities, battery range, and safety features, and Tesla has not delivered.” Haughan stated the primary motivation behind the class action in plain terms: “Tesla customers have not got what they paid for.”

More information about the Tesla Motors Class Action can be found here.

Community Spotlights

Community Spotlight: Aisling Byrne, Co-Founder, Nera Capital

By John Freund and 4 others |

Aisling Byrne is the Co-Founder of Nera Capital, a pioneering legal funding provider reshaping the landscape of litigation finance. Hailing from Ireland, she co-founded Nera Capital in response to the financial challenges following the 2008 global economic downturn, recognising the need for innovative funding solutions to support law firms and their clients.

With deep expertise in litigation finance, she has driven Nera Capital’s expansion into the UK consumer market while spearheading commercial litigation funding across Europe and the USA. Under her leadership, the firm has played a pivotal role in funding landmark actions in many jurisdictions. Beyond her professional achievements, Aisling is a passionate equestrian, competing internationally in showjumping with a talented string of horses.

Company Name: Nera Capital

Company Description: Founded in 2011, Nera Capital was established with a bold vision - to revolutionise legal finance by seamlessly integrating modern technology with traditional values. By funding essential disbursements, Nera Capital empowers law firms to pursue justice without financial constraints, ensuring that clients can access the legal representation they deserve.

With a proven track record of delivering pragmatic funding solutions, Nera has helped partner firms achieve remarkable growth in a short time. More than just a funder, Nera Capital serves as a strategic partner, leveraging its industry expertise, technology and extensive network to drive success for its clients.

Company Website: neracapital.com

Year Founded: 2011

Headquarters: Ireland, with offices in Manchester and The Netherlands

Areas of Focus: Nera Capital provides Law Firm funding across a diverse range of claim portfolios, including Financial Mis-selling, Data Breach, Personal Injury, and more. Always at the forefront of legal finance, Nera continually explores new claim types and remains open to innovative funding opportunities.

Member Quote: “When it comes to litigation funding, strategy and collaboration are key. A well-structured funding solution requires more than just financial backing - it demands a deep understanding of legal complexities, a forward-thinking approach, and a team that is both skilled and adaptable. At Nera Capital, we believe in building long-term partnerships with law firms, providing them with not just capital, but also the strategic guidance and support needed to navigate challenges and maximise success. By combining financial and technical expertise with a keen insight into evolving legal landscapes, we ensure that meritorious claims receive the investment they need to deliver justice.”

Consumer

Understanding Pre-Settlement Funding: A Resource for Plaintiffs Facing Long Legal Battles

By Harry Moran and 4 others |

Rockpoint Legal Funding has released a new educational overview on the role of pre-settlement funding for individuals involved in personal injury and other civil lawsuits. As court dockets swell and case timelines extend, plaintiffs often encounter mounting financial pressures that can influence their legal decisions. This overview examines the mechanics of pre-settlement funding, the considerations for deciding whether it is an appropriate option, and the broader context of litigation finance in the United States.

Pre-settlement funding—also known as legal funding or lawsuit advances—is a financial arrangement in which a provider offers immediate funds to plaintiffs who have an active legal claim. The advance is typically "non-recourse," which means that the plaintiff is only obligated to repay if the underlying case results in a monetary settlement or award. This structure aims to relieve short-term economic stress, such as covering medical bills or everyday living costs, without imposing the risk of personal liability if the case does not succeed.

Why Litigation Timelines Can Be Lengthy

In many jurisdictions, personal injury and other civil claims progress through multiple stages. The initial filing, discovery period, settlement negotiations, and potential trial can each introduce procedural delays. Moreover, defense counsel or insurance companies may seek extensions or engage in protracted negotiations, especially if the case is complex or involves substantial damages. These drawn-out timelines can place significant strain on plaintiffs who are juggling medical appointments, lost wages, or other unexpected expenses stemming from the incident in question.

How Non-Recourse Funding Operates

Non-recourse funding arrangements differ from traditional loans in two key ways. First, plaintiffs do not make monthly payments during the lawsuit's duration. Second, if the case concludes without a settlement or court award, the plaintiff typically owes nothing. However, if there is a successful outcome, the provider recovers its advance from the proceeds, plus any agreed-upon fees or charges. Because repayment depends on the lawsuit's success, funding companies evaluate the viability of a claim by reviewing documentation such as medical records, police reports, and legal filings. This vetting process helps determine both eligibility and the potential amount of funding offered.

Considerations for Plaintiffs

While pre-settlement funding can offer financial breathing room, it is not a universal solution for every litigant. Plaintiffs are advised to consult closely with their attorneys before deciding to move forward with an advance. An attorney can provide guidance on whether anticipated settlement amounts reasonably justify the costs associated with funding. Additionally, plaintiffs should take time to review any contract terms carefully, paying particular attention to fee structures and potential caps on interest. Regulatory requirements for transparency vary from state to state, and consumer protection advocates often encourage individuals to ask prospective funders for itemized disclosures that outline how expenses and interest accumulate over time.

Balancing Immediate Needs with Long-Term Outcomes

For many plaintiffs, the main appeal of pre-settlement funding lies in the ability to cover urgent expenses without feeling pressured to accept a premature or undervalued settlement. Financial stress can sometimes overshadow the pursuit of a fair legal resolution. Having access to funds to pay rent, medical bills, and utility costs can enable individuals to focus more effectively on recovering from injuries and collaborating with their legal teams. At the same time, the additional fees tied to funding must be weighed against the potential difference a plaintiff might receive if they negotiate a higher settlement by waiting. Striking a balance between meeting immediate needs and preserving future gains is a critical part of the decision-making process.

Regulatory Landscape and Industry Best Practices

The legal funding industry is subject to varying degrees of oversight. Several states have enacted or proposed regulations to ensure consumer protections. In some jurisdictions, legislators have mandated clear and conspicuous disclosures regarding interest rates, fee schedules, and any other costs that might be included in the repayment obligation. These efforts aim to safeguard plaintiffs from overextending themselves financially or unknowingly entering into agreements with unfavorable terms. Reputable legal funding companies generally support transparent industry standards, seeing them as essential for maintaining trust and helping plaintiffs fully understand the implications of the agreements they sign.

Potential Impact on the Legal Process

Plaintiffs considering pre-settlement funding often wonder whether accessing an advance will change how negotiations proceed. While the presence of funding does not directly alter the defendant's or insurance company's approach, plaintiffs who relieve their short-term financial hardships may feel less pressure to settle immediately. This dynamic can sometimes allow parties to conduct more thorough investigations, secure additional expert opinions, or wait for crucial evidence to come to light. Nonetheless, case outcomes depend on numerous factors—including liability assessments, the strength of the evidence, and judicial proceedings—and not solely on whether the plaintiff has opted for a funding advance.

Addressing Myths and Misconceptions

Despite growing awareness, misconceptions about lawsuit funding persist. One common myth is that plaintiffs give up control of their case when they secure an advance. In practice, a reputable funding provider does not direct case strategy or negotiations; plaintiffs and their attorneys maintain full authority over legal decisions. Another misconception is that high rates inevitably accompany all pre-settlement advances. While some companies may impose significant fees, others strive for more balanced terms. Conducting comparative research and consulting third-party resources can help plaintiffs identify funding options that align with their specific needs.

Informing Plaintiffs and Attorneys

Through its resource materials and ongoing educational initiatives, Rockpoint Legal Funding aims to clarify how pre-settlement advances fit into the broader legal landscape. Attorneys can benefit by understanding the various funding options available to clients, enabling them to offer well-rounded advice. Meanwhile, plaintiffs gain insight into navigating what can be a confusing world of financial products and services. Informed decision-making involves not only estimating the value of a legal claim but also realistically appraising personal financial requirements and the time it may take to resolve a case.

About Rockpoint Legal Funding

Rockpoint Legal Funding provides non-recourse cash advances to plaintiffs in personal injury and other civil cases. The company's primary goal is to help individuals facing extended litigation address pressing financial concerns so they can pursue a fair legal outcome. Through transparent practices, Rockpoint endeavors to equip both plaintiffs and their attorneys with clear information, enabling them to decide whether a funding advance is appropriate for their circumstances.

For more information about Rockpoint Legal Funding, visit rockpointlegalfunding.com.

Announcements Commercial Fundraising

Omni Bridgeway Announces Financial Close of Fund 9

By Harry Moran and 4 others |

Omni Bridgeway Limited (ASX: OBL) (Omni Bridgeway, OBL) is pleased to announce  Financial Close of its Secondary Market Transaction ,which was first announced upon signing on 18 December 2024 (link). The transaction involves the establishment of Fund 9 as a continuation fund, with funds managed by Ares Management Corporation (Ares) as the capital provider. Fund 9 has acquired a number of Omni Bridgeway’s co-investment interests in its funds.

An initial payment of A$275m has been received from Ares, which has been used to fully repay OBL’s outstanding debt of A$250m and to meet transaction costs, with the balance going to OBL to fund working capital requirements.

OBL is entitled to a further upfront consideration payment to reflect the balance of value of the interests acquired by Fund 9 at the time of signing.  This is due to be received from Ares at the end of March 2025. OBL expects the total upfront proceeds to be in the range of A$310m–A$320m, subject to interim FX movements.

1H25 results webcastFollowing the release of its results for the six months to 31 December 2024, OBL will host a market briefing at 9:30am AEDT on Thursday 27 February 2025. To access this event, please register at https://webcast.openbriefing.com/obl-hyr-2025/.

Case Developments Commercial

Federal Court of Australia Rules Against Claimants in Shareholder Class Action Funded by LCM

By Harry Moran and 4 others |

Whilst Australia remains a top jurisdiction for litigation funders looking to support impactful class actions, there is no amount of due diligence or analysis that can guarantee the end result will be a positive one for the claimants or funder.

An announcement from Litigation Capital Management (LCM) revealed that the Federal Court of Australia has provided an unfavourable ruling in a shareholder class action that LCM had funded. The class action was brought against Quintis Limited and its auditors, Ernst & Young, over allegations that they had engaged in false or misleading conduct which resulted in shareholders suffering financial losses.

LCM noted that whilst the Federal Court ruled that both the above parties had “engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct”, the claimants had not been able to prove  that this conduct had directly resulted in loss and damage. In the ruling, Justice Sharrif concluded that he was “not satisfied that the Davis Applicants have established their case as to causation, such that they have not established their case as to recovery of causally-connected loss.”

LCM disclosed that it has invested A$13.2 million in the case, which is supported by an insurance policy to cover any adverse costs exposure. Furthermore, LCM stated that there is a 28-day window for any appeal against the judgment to be filed, with the funder and its legal team currently considering “the merits of any appeal.” 

Patrick Moloney, CEO of LCM, provided the following statement on the Federal Court’s ruling: "In this shareholder class action, our funded claim established misleading and deceptive conduct by the director and the auditors on the facts before the court. The case did not succeed in determining loss caused by this conduct and we are considering carefully with our legal team why this is the case. It is an unusual outcome that the court found that the financial statements in question were misleading, but that this did not result in loss for the shareholders in Quintis. Our focus now is on assessing the Judgment and determining the best course of action alongside our legal team. We remain committed to our disciplined approach in managing risk and capital across our portfolio."

The full judgment from the Federal Court can be read here.

Case Developments Commercial

Competition Appeal Tribunal Approves £200m Settlement in Mastercard Case

By Harry Moran and 4 others |

As LFJ reported last week, the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) was the venue for one of the most interesting settlement approval hearings in recent memory, as the class representative and litigation funder found themselves at odds over a proposed settlement.

An article in The Law Society Gazette covers the news that the CAT has approved the £200 million settlement in the collective action brought by Walter Merricks CBE against Mastercard. The approval came following the end of a three-day hearing where the Tribunal heard arguments from counsel for Merricks, Mastercard, and for the litigation funder who had backed the legal action, Innsworth Capital. Hodge Malek KC, Chairman of the CAT, praised Merricks dedication to the case and noted that “the fact the outcome has been disappointing in the light of how the evidence and rulings have developed does not detract from that.”

Merricks welcomed the Tribunal’s approval of the settlement, explaining that while he had “clearly hoped to have recovered more”, given the way the case had played out over the last few years, the settlement represented “the best amount possible”. Merricks’ legal team similarly highlighted the positive result after the prolonged duration of the collective action, with Boris Bronfentrinker, partner at Willkie Farr & Gallagher, describing the settlement as the “culmination of more than eight years of hard work”. 

Bronfentrinker appeared to take aim at the litigation funder’s intervention to try and block the settlement, saying that it was “most unfortunate that Innsworth chose to fight the settlement and to also threaten Mr Merricks personally by starting litigation against him.” 

Mr Justice Roth, Acting President of the CAT, said that the final judgment on the collective action would be delivered within “the next three weeks.”

Announcements Consumer

Legal-Bay Pre-Settlement Funding Company Renews Focus on FELA and Railroad Cases in Light of Newly-filed Wrongful Death Lawsuits Against Norfolk Southern Railroad

By Harry Moran and 4 others |

Legal-Bay, the premier Pre Settlement Funding Company, announces today that they are expanding their FELA and railroad injury claims department due to an increase in railway worker personal injury claims and the recent wrongful death lawsuit filed against Norfolk Southern Railroad.

The Norfolk case was filed earlier this month on the second anniversary of the tragic East Palestine, Ohio train derailment and subsequent toxic spill where plaintiffs claim multiple lingering health issues, including seven deaths. The lawsuit also levels accusations against the EPA and CDC, alleging that neither organization carried out a proper cleanup, nor warned residents about the potential health risks, elevating fears that their sudden mysterious illnesses could progress into something more serious.

Train derailments are only one of many reasons railroad lawsuits are filed. Everyday commuters can be victims of criminal violence on subways, or be injured due to improperly maintained train cars or railway stations. Plaintiffs will normally file negligence suits against the rail line and even the city itself for failing to keep their passengers safe.

If you are a plaintiff in any type of active railroad injury litigation and need an immediate cash advance lawsuit loan against an impending lawsuit settlement, please visit Legal-Bay HERE or call toll-free at 877.571.0405.

Chris Janish, CEO, commented, "Our funding on FELA cases this year is up over 100%. Legal-Bay is putting a large focus on train accidents in light of recent national headlines. We have always been a leader in FELA cases because of our expertise and our ability to provide ample capital for the long haul on these cases."

In addition to passenger lawsuits, there has also been an increase in FELA funding requests from railway employees within recent months. Legal Bay has even launched a new website specifically built for railroad FELA claims and railroad workers. The lawsuit funding company also secured more capital for railroad workers and employees covered under the FELA Act of 1908, which provides financial relief for railroad employees seeking workers compensation for an injury sustained on the job or in the yard.

If you are (or were) a railroad worker who has filed a lawsuit because of injuries you've suffered due to no fault of your own, or if you were injured due to negligence of your rail company or supervisor, or if you were hurt on the job because of faulty equipment or unsafe working conditions, then you may qualify for legal funding.

If you are a plaintiff or attorney involved in an active FELA railroad injury lawsuit and need an immediate cash advance lawsuit loan against an impending settlement, please visit our specialized FELA website HERE or call toll-free at 877.571.0405.

While railway workers need to take a few extra steps, most everyday victims of railroad injuries can file personal injury lawsuits. Damages in railroad injury cases are in line with other personal injury settlement awards such as reimbursement for lost earnings, medical expenses, and physical as well as mental pain and suffering.

Legal-Bay has been funding train accidents for the last 15 years and focuses much of their attention to certain cities and states: New York, NY; Newark, New Jersey; Boston, Massachusetts; Philadelphia, PA; Washington, D.C.; Atlanta, GA; Nashville, TN; Chicago, IL; and Los Angeles, CA to name a few. 

They are often referred to as one of the best lawsuit loan companies out there and the best lawsuit funding provider for railroad workers, in part because the lawsuit settlement loan company offers the quickest approvals and lowest rates industry wide. Contact Legal-Bay today or visit our specialized FELA website HERE to find out why we are considered the top lawsuit money lender around.

Legal-Bay advocates for victims of railroad injuries, but they provide settlement loan funding for all types of cases including personal injury, dog bites, slip and falls, car accidents, boat accidents, motorcycle accidents, bike accidents, truck accidents, and more.

Legal-Bay provides some of the best rates and fastest approvals in the industry, less than 24-48 hours in some cases. They offer free lawsuit evaluation on your settlement amount or case value, along with no out-of-pocket expenses or upfront costs. Their settlement funding loans have helped numerous plaintiffs by providing immediate cash in advance of a lawsuit's anticipated monetary award. The non-recourse law suit loans—sometimes referred to as loans for lawsuit or loans on settlement—are risk-free, as the money doesn't need to be repaid should the recipient lose their case. Therefore, the lawsuit loans aren't really a loan, but rather a cash advance.

To learn more about Legal-Bay's funding for FELA claims, railroad worker, railway passenger personal injury lawsuits, railroad lawsuit loans, rail worker personal injury pre settlement funding, railroad employees personal injury settlement loans, or railroad worker personal injury lawsuit loan funds, please visit the company's website HERE to apply right now or call toll-free at: 877.571.0405 where friendly and helpful agents are standing by to answer your questions.

Case Developments Commercial

CAT Hearing for £200m Mastercard Settlement Highlights Divide Between Funder and Class Representative

By Harry Moran and 4 others |

Whilst the successes of collective proceedings supported by litigation funders are regularly highlighted by the legal funding industry, an ongoing dispute at the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) between a class representative and funder over a proposed settlement shows that it is not always a relationship in which both parties see eye to eye.

An article in The Law Society Gazette provides a summary of the ongoing hearing at the CAT, as the tribunal hears arguments as to whether the £200 million settlement in the Mastercard hearing should be approved or not. The hearing, which is scheduled to last until the end of the week, saw counsel for the claimant, defendant and funder each offer their arguments on whether the judges should proceed with the collective settlement approval order (CSAO).

Mark Brealey KC, counsel for class representative Walter Merricks CBE, stated that it was the position of both Merricks and Mastercard that the value of the settlement was “in a range that was fair and reasonable.” Responding to the intervention of Innsworth Capital, the litigation funder opposing the settlement, Brealey argued that “the funder should be respectful of the way that Mr Merricks has conducted the proceedings”.

Charles Bear KC, representing Innsworth as the intervener, highlighted the cost of the funder’s support for the case and argued that approval would mean that “the class does not get a fair return on this settlement on any view of distribution.” Bear went further and emphatically stated that Innsworth’s view is that “it is completely clear the settlement prescribes zero value to the case, not little value, but nothing.”

Sonia Tolaney KC, counsel for Mastercard, suggested that it was the views of the class representative and defendant that should hold the most weight, arguing that “There is no doubt that in this case the parties themselves are best placed to assess the merits [of the settlement].” Tolaney also targeted Innsworth’s questioning of whether the £200 million settlement was the best possible outcome for the class representative, declaring that in Mastercard’s view, “that is the wrong question.”

Announcements Commercial

BNP Paribas’ Securities Services Business Adopts Broadridge’s Global Class Action Solution to Maximize its Clients’ Global Asset Recovery Opportunities

By Harry Moran and 4 others |

BNP Paribas’ Securities Services business, a leading global custodian with USD 13.7 trillion under custody, has partnered with global Fintech leader, Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc. (NYSE:BR) to expand its global custody services, appointing Broadridge as service provider for its global securities class action services.

“As the Securities Services business of BNP Paribas, we are committed to delivering innovative and differentiating products and services to our clients. Broadridge brings advanced technology, market-leading information security and deep industry expertise that align with our goals, enhancing our clients’ experience and supporting their business,” said Christian Houillon, Head of Custody Product for Securities Services at BNP Paribas. “We will be able to harness Broadridge’s proprietary technology to identify, file and recover investment losses, alongside their extensive industry expertise.”

Broadridge provides a comprehensive, proprietary technology solution for global class action services that will help clients identify and act on asset recovery opportunities. This includes a seamless process for identifying, filing, and recovering investment losses, backed by Broadridge's industry expertise.

“As the volume of securities class actions continues to rise, it’s crucial for the clients of BNP Paribas’ Securities Services business and other global financial institutions to leverage all available asset recovery opportunities,” said Steve Cirami, Vice President, Head of Corporate Actions & Class Actions at Broadridge. “Broadridge’s solutions will enable the clients of BNP Paribas’ Securities Services business to obtain all required information to support their decisions on claim recoveries, facilitate investor participation in settlements and support key business functions, delivering a seamless and impactful client experience.”

Investors have more recovery opportunities than ever before as the class action landscape continues to expand globally with more than 35 jurisdictions around the world adopting collective redress mechanisms for shareholders. In 2024 alone, there were more than 125 recovery opportunities and $5.2 billion in settlements. The ability to monitor all opportunities globally requires leading edge technology and expertise, particularly in jurisdictions where considerations of litigation can be complex to navigate.

Broadridge’s dedicated global class action services team comprises deeply knowledgeable and experienced securities litigators, claims administrators, claims auditors and data specialists, equipped to provide clients with unmatched end-to-end services, portfolio monitoring and claims filing and registering processes in global jurisdictions. Learn more about the team here.

About Securities Services at BNP Paribas (securities.cib.bnpparibas)

BNP Paribas’ Securities Services business is a leading global custodian providing multi-asset post-trade and asset servicing solutions to buy-side and sell-side market participants, corporates and issuers. With a global reach covering 90+ markets, its custody network is one of the most extensive in the industry, enabling clients to maximise their investment opportunities worldwide. As a pillar of BNP Paribas’ diversified banking model, Securities Services provides asset servicing solutions that are closely integrated with the first-class services of the Group’s other business lines, in particular those of Global Banking and Global Markets.

As of 31 December 2024, Securities Services had USD 13.7 trillion in assets under custody and USD 2.8 trillion in assets under administration.

About Broadridge

Broadridge Financial Solutions (NYSE: BR) is a global technology leader with the trusted expertise and transformative technology to help clients and the financial services industry operate, innovate, and grow. We power investing, governance, and communications for our clients – driving operational resiliency, elevating business performance, and transforming investor experiences. 

Our technology and operations platforms process and generate over 7 billion communications per year and underpin the daily trading of more than $10 trillion of securities globally. A certified Great Place to Work®, Broadridge is part of the S&P 500® Index, employing over 14,000 associates in 21 countries.

For more information about us, please visit www.broadridge.com.

Community Spotlights

Community Spotlight: Craig Geraghty, Legal Director, O’Connors Legal Services

By John Freund and 4 others |

Craig is a highly experienced corporate lawyer and Head of Corporate at O'Connors. His expertise covers a broad range of high-value transactions, including mergers and acquisitions, private equity deals, business reorganisations and restructurings, joint ventures, corporate governance, and regulatory matters. He also has significant experience of advising law firms on litigation funding arrangements.

Craig joined O'Connors from global law firm Bedell Cristin where he handled significant offshore transactional work in their Jersey office. Craig’s offshore experience is a valuable asset, particularly for O'Connors investment fund and insurance practices, while his expertise in litigation funding is a key asset for the firm's legal sector clients.

Company Name and Description: O’Connors Legal Services Limited (which trades as O’Connors). O'Connors is a nationally recognised firm of business lawyers and advisers. Although business sector agnostic, the firm has particular expertise in supporting legal businesses, including law firms, barristers' chambers and claims management companies. Its unique blend of corporate, commercial, insurance, and regulatory legal expertise and unparalleled sector knowledge delivers strategic support and innovative solutions to help legal businesses navigate the legal landscape, manage risk and capitalise on market opportunities.

Website: https://www.oconnors.law

Founded: 2003

Headquarters: Liverpool - additional office in London

Area of Focus: Corporate, Commercial, Commercial Insurance, Litigation Funding, Financial Services and Legal Services Regulation

Member Quote: “We are known as the law firm for law firms and our deep understanding of the legal regulatory landscape means we are perfectly placed to assist law firms in accessing the resources they need to pursue justice through litigation funding.”

Commercial Law Firm Corner Legal Innovation Thought Leadership

How WFH Communication is Impacting Law Firms and Legal Funders

By Kris Altiere and 4 others |

The following article was contributed by Kris Altiere, US Head of Marketing for Moneypenny.

The boundaries between professional and personal life have blurred, largely due to technology and the pandemic, which forced firms to be available 24/7. Since COVID, the number of clients and prospects engaging with businesses at all hours has surged, driven by the adoption of tools like live chat—which, at one point, accounted for 37% of interactions outside traditional 9-to-5 hours. In fact, a Moneypenny study conducted with Censuswide, surveying over 2,000 U.S. consumers, found that 58% of respondents now accept work-related communications outside regular hours. But is this shift a good thing?

Law firms should consider the communication training they give across all situations – how many work calls have been taken in the car, texts responded to at a soccer practice, or emails replied to quickly while at the doctor? Adjusting a firm’s contact channels should include recognizing the strengths and weaknesses of different forms of communication, and thinking about what’s best for clients and the team.

For firms, the “always on” employee presents some potential challenges, starting with the impact on the mental health of someone pressured to forever be on alert for a client or new business. It also can present vulnerabilities – Moneypenny’s research revealed 59% of respondents admitted to commonly sending texts and emails to the wrong person. Or, there is the liability of a stretched team responding to a client with a typo or incorrect information, feeling pressured to get right back and not taken time for a measured response. Along with an increased margin of error, digital communication can lack the emotion of a conversation, or may not appeal as a form of connection from a generational perspective.

Moneypenny looked into the popularity of different forms of work communications. Emails were number one at 49%, followed by the phone at 39%, text messaging at 35%, instant messaging such as Teams or Slack at 19%, and video conferencing like Zoom at 18%. Choices were particular to generations – emailing is the preferred choice for 56% of Baby Boomers and 54% of Gen X, while only 28% of Gen Z prefer it. Instant messaging was a more popular form of work communication for Gen Z (25%), but was chosen by only 16% of Gen X and 13% of Baby Boomers.

Moneypenny encourages firms of all sizes to establish clear communication guidelines that best serve all of their constituents – their teams, their prospects, and their clients. After four years of being on call around the clock, teams are tired. If a firm can have the burden of the 2 a.m. call or chat placed in the hands of a capable and trained legal receptionist like Moneypenny’s, they can ensure it’s not just fielded, but fielded well, and their team undisturbed.

Setting healthy business-life boundaries is a lofty goal that firms should consider setting this year – making themselves a little more unavailable to make themself more available. Fielding a call late at night or during a mad rush does a disservice by potentially inhibiting work flow, mental health, quality and integrity of the work. In what seems like an increasingly scattered world, reclaiming focus by letting someone else “get the phone” could just be revolutionary.

--

Kris Altiere is US Head of Marketing at Moneypenny. Moneypenny’s unique blend of brilliant people and AI technology integrate seamlessly to deliver customer conversations that unlock valuable opportunities for law firms, 24/7.

Kris is passionate about combining creativity and data-driven approaches to deliver impactful campaigns. A natural leader and mentor, she thrives on empowering teams, fostering collaboration, and ensuring Moneypenny’s solutions help firms stay ahead in an ever-evolving market.

Commercial

Bench Walk Advisors Named Litigation Funder of the Year at Chambers UK Awards

By Harry Moran and 4 others |

As LFJ covered last month, the new year is not only a time for firms to look ahead to their plans for next 12 months, it is also a time where the work and achievements of industry leaders from the previous year is celebrated.

Last week, the inaugural Chambers UK Awards were held in London with an opportunity to recognise the country’s top legal professionals, with awards handed out across a wide array of categories. When it came to legal funding, Chambers assembled a shortlist of five funders which was whittled down to just one, with Bench Walk Advisors named as Litigation Funder of the Year.

Chambers provided the following explanation for selecting Bench Walk as the winner in this category: “Bench Walk has consistently ranked as a top litigation funder in the UK. It wins praise for its boutique, director-led approach and for its ability to fund complex cases with a high degree of responsiveness and transparency. This year, the team has continued to work on a diverse portfolio of group actions, including Professor Carolyn Roberts’ opt-out CAT claim against water utility companies and an action against Google relating to the Google Play Store, as well as portfolio funding deals and law firm financing.”

Chambers have many more awards evenings planned in the coming months, with the Europe Awards scheduled to be held on May 29 in Madrid.

Commercial People Moves

Bertrand Beauchesne Appointed Group Finance Director at Deminor

By Harry Moran and 4 others |

Deminor announced that Bertrand Beauchesne has been appointed as Group Finance Director, bringing over 20 years of experience in financial management and strategic planning across Europe, Asia, Africa, and the Middle East. 

Prior to joining Deminor, Beauchesne spent over eight years at Dorier Group in Singapore, having served as the company’s Group Finance Director and Board Director, co-ordinating and supporting all operations in South East Asia and Japan. His impressive career also includes six years at MCI Group overseeing strategy and regional coordination for APAC, 16 months at The Stakeholder Company as Finance Director, and over four years as Finance Director for the Remote Site Division at ADEN Group

Beauchesne expressed his enthusiasm at taking on the new role at Deminor, saying: “I am excited to join Deminor and look forward to contributing to the company's continued success by leveraging my experience in financial management and strategic planning. Deminor’s dedication to excellence and innovation aligns with my professional philosophy, and I look forward to driving our financial and strategic goals.”

Deminor’s CEO, Erik Bomans also provided the following comment on Beauchesne’s appointment: "We are delighted to welcome Bertrand Beauchesne as our new Group Finance Director. Bertrand's appointment reflects our commitment to further strengthen Deminor's financial governance and operational capabilities. His proven track record in financial leadership and strategic planning makes him an excellent addition to our team as we continue to expand our global presence."

Commercial People Moves

Litigation Lending Appoints Leo Argy and Maximilian Heffernan as Investment Managers

By Harry Moran and 4 others |

In a series of posts, Litigation Lending announced the new appointments of Leo Argy and Maximilian Heffernan, who are both joining the funder as Investment Managers.

Argy brings over 25 years’ experience in the legal sector to his new role at Litigation Lending, having begun his career as a solicitor in 1997, going on to become the Managing Solicitor-Director at Argy & Associates Lawyers between 2001 and 2021. Argy joins Litigation Lending having most recently served as Manager of Litigation and Recoveries at Hollard Insurance Australia for the past three years. 

Heffernan also boasts an impressive career in the legal sector, both in the public and private sector, having started as a paralegal at Clayton Utz before serving as an Associate at the Federal Court of Australia. Since then, Heffernan has worked as a solicitor at Hicksons Lawyers, and most recently spent nearly six years as a Senior Lawyer at Australian Government Solicitor in the Civil Claims team.

Community Spotlights

Community Spotlight: Dane Lund, Managing Director, Juris Capital

By John Freund and 4 others |

Dane Lund has built a career at the intersection of law and finance, bringing a distinctive blend of legal acumen and financial expertise to the evolving world of litigation funding. He began his professional journey after graduating from Harvard Law School as a litigation associate at Willkie Farr & Gallagher in 2012, where he gained firsthand experience navigating complex commercial disputes and understanding the strategic nuances that drive legal outcomes.

Eager to broaden his perspective, Dane transitioned into investment banking, joining the Financial Sponsors Group at Barclays. There, he developed a rigorous foundation in evaluating risk, structuring deals, and analyzing the dynamics of capital markets—skills that would later prove invaluable in the realm of legal finance.

Following his time at Barclays, Dane pursued investment roles focused on equities, private debt, and legal finance, deepening his expertise across both traditional and alternative asset classes. This diverse background positioned him perfectly for the litigation finance space, where legal strategy and capital management intersect. In 2024, he joined Juris Capital as Managing Director, where he helps shape the firm’s approach to funding commercial litigation.

At the core of Dane’s investment philosophy is a simple yet powerful belief: “Patient capital wins.”

For Dane, this isn’t just a tagline—it’s the guiding principle. Litigation is inherently unpredictable, often requiring strategic persistence and disciplined, long-term thinking to achieve the best outcomes. In an industry where quick returns are rare, Dane emphasizes that success comes from having the foresight to invest thoughtfully and the patience to see cases through to their full potential.

“We’re experiencing a sea change in how law is practiced,” says Dane. “Legal finance isn’t just a funding mechanism—it’s a catalyst for innovation within the legal sector.”

Company Name and Description: Juris Capital provides funding for commercial litigation claims. The firm collaborates with businesses and law firms to support the financial aspects of pursuing complex legal matters. Dane notes that Juris’s approach is shaped by its understanding of legal processes and the financial considerations involved in managing long-term investments. Its focus spans a variety of case types, including breach of contract disputes, corporate governance issues, and antitrust matters.

Website: https://www.juriscapitalcorp.com/

Founded: 2009

Headquarters: Chicago

Member Quote: “Legal finance is expanding beyond traditional litigation into areas like legal tech, contingent risk management, and law firm operations. It’s not just about funding cases anymore—it’s about unlocking value in legal assets that were previously considered illiquid or inaccessible. That’s where the future lies.”

Commercial Regulatory Issues

Burford CEO Condemns UK Government’s ‘Failure to Act’ on PACCAR

By Harry Moran and 4 others |

As LFJ reported last week, the Court of Appeal has decided to hear arguments over the validity of litigation funding agreements that use a multiple of the sum invested. As we suggested, this decision has emboldened funders who are dismayed at the government’s delays in enacting a legislative fix for PACCAR.

In a piece for the Financial Times, Christopher Bogart, co-founder and chief executive of Burford Capital, takes aim at the UK government’s “failure to act” in providing a solution for the litigation funding industry following the Supreme Court’s PACCAR ruling. Bogart argues that whilst the Prime Minister has repeatedly spoken about the need for the country to attract investment, the delay in acting on this issue “threatens to create an environment in which businesses and their money leave the UK to the detriment of the economy and workforce.”

In what is perhaps the most startling admission, and a thinly veiled challenge to the government, Bogart states that Burford “is reconsidering whether London is a preferred dispute resolution centre.” Whilst this appears to be a warning of what could occur, Bogart reports that “the lingering uncertainty and the government’s silence has caused the company to begin migrating some dispute resolution activity away from London.”

In his explanation of the challenges the UK funding market faces, Bogart highlights the industry trends post-PACCAR and points out that there has been a 75 per cent decrease in funding activity in the UK since the Supreme Court’s ruling. Burford’s CEO also points to the 23 per cent drop in group claims in 2024, which he attributes to the “uncertainty in the market.”

Without naming the specific cases, Bogart appears to reference the recent move by “opportunistic defendants” to challenge certain litigation funding agreements in class actions. Urging the government to provide a legislative solution sooner rather than later, Bogart argues that the alternative is a situation where the UK will face growing competition from abroad as “funders will look elsewhere to less risky options.”

Commercial Regulatory Issues

Indian Government Minister: No Plans for Regulation of Litigation Funding

By Harry Moran and 4 others |

Outside of the prime litigation funding markets of the US, UK and Australia, developments from burgeoning markets are often few and far between. However, a new ministerial statement from the Indian government suggests that India has the potential to be a significant growth market for legal funding.

An article in Bar and Bench provides a useful insight into the litigation funding landscape in India, as it highlights a recent statement by a government minister that indicates there are currently no plans to implement new regulations governing third-party funding. 

Arjun Ram Meghwal, Minister of State of the Ministry of Law & Justice, was responding to a parliamentary question about the issue of legal funding and said:

“At present, there is no proposal under consideration of the Government for establishment of a legal and regulatory framework to facilitate Third Party Funding of litigation in the country and further, no examination of the potential of Third Party Litigation Funding as a means to address high litigation costs and pendency of cases has been carried out by the Government.”

As the Bar and Bench article notes, this is yet another encouraging sign for the Indian litigation funding industry which has been growing since a 2018 Supreme Court decision recognised the validity of third-party litigation funding. 

Case Developments Commercial

Omni Bridgeway Funding New Zealand Class Action Against Johnson & Johnson

By Harry Moran and 4 others |

For consumers who were unwittingly deceived by falsely advertised products, a well-funded class action remains one of the few options available for these individuals to seek justice and compensation.

Reporting by The Post covers a new class action filed in the High Court of New Zealand, which is being brought against Johnson & Johnson over the alleged sale of ineffective cold and flu medications. The lawsuit alleges that Johnson & Johnson manufactured cold and flu products containing Penylephrine, which some medical studies have found is not an effective oral treatment for nasal congestion. Eligibility for the class action includes consumers in New Zealand who purchased one of the 17 identified Codral, Sudafed or Benadryl branded products between 2005 and 2025.

The class action has been brought by Australian law firm JGA Saddler, with litigation funding provided by Omni Bridgeway. This is the second such lawsuit brought against Johnson & Johnson by this team, with JGA and Omni having worked together to bring a similar class action against the pharmaceutical giant in 2024.

Rebecca Jancauskas, director at JGA Saddler, argues that “Johnson & Johnson has misled the public and they need to be held accountable for their actions.” Furthermore, Jancauskas suggests that there may be a larger pool of affected customers in New Zealand than Australia, explaining that between 2011 and 2024 “there was no other alternative for consumers in New Zealand suffering from sinus symptoms or allergy symptoms or cold and flu symptoms.”

Additional information on the class action can be found on Omni Bridgeway’s website.

Announcements Commercial People Moves

Victory Park Capital Expands Legal Credit Team, Welcomes Hugo Lestiboudois as Principal

By Harry Moran and 4 others |

Victory Park Capital (“VPC”), a global alternative investment firm specializing in private credit, today announced that Hugo Lestiboudois has joined the firm as Principal. Mr. Lestiboudois, who brings over 10 years of experience in developing and operating legal finance strategies, will work alongside Richard Levy, VPC CEO, CIO & Founder, and Chad Clamage, Managing Director, to advance the firm’s legal credit strategy.

“We welcome Hugo to the firm with great excitement,” said Levy. “I am confident that his experience will help us unlock further momentum in the rapidly expanding market for legal investing and address the growing demand for innovative funding solutions.”

VPC’s legal credit team, comprised of veteran litigators, legal finance investors, and seasoned private credit professionals, takes an asset-backed lending approach to the legal asset class, emphasizing downside protection and current income streams. With its deep expertise and extensive industry relationships, VPC is well-positioned to capitalize on market inefficiencies and pursue opportunities across the full spectrum of legal asset types and structures.

“I am thrilled to join the VPC team and help further scale the legal credit strategy,” Lestiboudois said. “With a highly diversified portfolio of asset-backed legal assets and robust risk management controls, VPC’s disciplined and innovative approach creates resilience against market volatility and enables us to excel in the legal credit market.”

Previously, Mr. Lestiboudois was a principal at Syz Capital where he oversaw the firm’s legal finance strategies. Prior to that, Mr. Lestiboudois led the Illiquid Investments Desk at IVO Capital Partners where he focused on European distressed and structured credit transactions. Earlier in his career, Mr. Lestiboudois focused on asset-backed financing in his role at AgFe and held analyst positions at Capital Management and BlackRock.

About Victory Park Capital

Victory Park Capital Advisors, LLC (“VPC” or the “Firm”) is a global alternative asset manager that specializes in private asset-backed credit. In addition, the Firm offers comprehensive structured financing and capital markets solutions through its affiliate platform, Triumph Capital Markets. The Firm was founded in 2007 and is headquartered in Chicago. In 2024, VPC became a majority-owned affiliate of Janus Henderson Group. The Firm leverages the broader resources of Janus Henderson’s 2,000+ employees across offices in 24 cities worldwide. VPC is a Registered Investment Advisor with the SEC. For more information, please visit www.victoryparkcapital.com.

Community Spotlights

Community Spotlight: Burke McDavid, Co-Chair of the Investment Management & Private Funds Industry Group, Winstead PC

By John Freund and 4 others |

Burke McDavid is a seasoned attorney with a comprehensive understanding of investment management, compliance and corporate law. With more than two decades of experience, he brings a wealth of experience in both private practice as well as overseeing legal and compliance matters as General Counsel and Chief Compliance Officer for a registered investment adviser managing funds focused on litigation funding.

Company Name and Description: Winstead is a leading Texas-based law firm with national practices serving clients across the country. We focus on exceeding our clients’ expectations by providing innovative solutions to their business and legal opportunities and challenges. We work as a trusted counsel to public and private companies, governments, individuals, universities, and public institutions.

Our business, transactions, and litigation practices serve key industries, including real estate, financial services, investment management and private funds, higher education and P3, airlines, healthcare and life sciences, sports business, and wealth management.

Company Website:  Winstead.com

Founded: 1973

Headquarters: Dallas, Texas

Areas of Focus: Investment Management and Private Funds

Member Quote: “Having assisted with the launch and operations of a litigation funding focused manager in 2013, and later having served as general counsel and chief compliance officer for that manager, I've seen the growth of the industry and enjoyed assisting with the unique challenges that funders and funding recipients face in structuring and working through funding relationships."

Community Spotlights

Community Spotlight: Patrick Yoder, CEO, Osage Capital

By John Freund and 4 others |

Osage Capital was founded by Patrick Yoder, an entrepreneur with over 20 years of experience at the intersection of healthcare and legal services. Patrick has led startups and publicly traded companies in both industries, including being the Chief Revenue Officer of one of the largest publicly traded Healthcare Management Companies in Texas and most recently, the President and Owner of Lone Star Attorney Service. Driven by a commitment to continuous improvement, Patrick established Osage Capital to address a critical need in personal injury cases: ensuring that victims receive timely access to healthcare while maintaining the strength of their legal claims.

Company Name and Description: At Osage Capital, our mission is to accelerate cash flow and growth for legal and medical professionals, providing the financial resources necessary to focus on achieving justice and favorable settlements. Our tailored solutions, including medical funding and pre-litigation financing, enable attorneys and healthcare providers to optimize their services for better outcomes.

By accelerating cash flow, Osage Capital ensures that clients can focus on their recovery without financial pressure, attorneys can concentrate on their legal strategy, free from concerns about case expenses, and healthcare providers receive prompt compensation, allowing them to maintain their cash flow and continue offering high-quality care without waiting for settlements to be finalized.

Company Website:  www.osagecapital.com

Founded:  2024

Headquarters: Houston, TX

Areas of Focus: Pre Litigation Finance and Medical Funding

Member Quote: “Our goal is to ensure that every party involved in a personal injury case is empowered to focus on their strengths. We streamline the financial aspect so that clients can heal, attorneys can pursue justice, and healthcare providers can deliver the care that’s needed—without delays."

Announcements Consumer

Legal-Bay Pre-Settlement Funding Announces Additional Capital for Wrongful Termination Cases Due to Sexual Harassment and Sexual Abuse

Legal-Bay LLC, The Lawsuit Settlement Funding Company, reports today that they have set aside a large portion of their pre-settlement cash advance funding capital specifically for plaintiffs of sexual harassment cases. Legal-Bay has vast experience with unlawful termination and wrongful unemployment lawsuits related to sexual harassment and retaliation, as well as racial, gender, or age-related discrimination, whether in the office or elsewhere. Based on recent court case filings, the premier funding firm anticipates even more wrongful termination lawsuit filings to come.

Legal-Bay delivers financial assistance to people who've recently found themselves unlawfully unemployed, providing cash advances to plaintiffs while their cases are tied up in litigation. Sadly, sexual harassment is all too common in corporate workspaces, and if a person on the receiving end of it loses their job because of it, loss of pay or benefits can add financial stress to an already emotional situation. Lawsuit loans can offer a bit of monetary help during a trying time.

Chris Janish, CEO, commented, "While it's disconcerting to see an increase in sexual harassment filings, it's heartening to know that people aren't hesitating to file suit against their offenders. Many unlawfully terminated victims are unable to get new jobs right away, and sometimes a cash advance from Legal-Bay is the only way to pay the bills."

If you're an attorney or plaintiff in an ongoing wrongful termination, sexual abuse, sexual harassment, retaliation, racial, age, or gender discrimination lawsuit and require an immediate cash advance lawsuit loan from your anticipated lawsuit settlement, please visit our website HERE or call 877.571.0405.

Legal-Bay is an advocate for victims involved in sexual misconduct, sexual harassment, and sexual abuse cases. Their settlement loan programs offer immediate cash in advance of a plaintiff's anticipated monetary award for many other types of sex crime cases such as clergy or Catholic Church sexual abuse cases, prison rape cases, police brutality, and more. The non-recourse lawsuit loans also help victims involved in unlawful termination and wrongful unemployment lawsuits, personal injury lawsuits, car and truck accidents, commercial litigation, verdict or judgment on appeal cases, medical malpractice, and more.

Legal-Bay's programs are non-recourse lawsuit cash advances—sometimes referred to as loans for lawsuits or loans on settlement—and are risk-free, as the money doesn't need to be repaid should the recipient lose their case. Therefore, the lawsuit loans aren't really a loan, but rather a cash advance.

Legal-Bay has some of the quickest turnaround in the industry, normally getting plaintiffs cash-in-hand within 48-hours of filing an application. If you require money now, please visit the company's website HERE or call 877.571.0405 where skilled agents are standing by. 

Announcements Commercial Regulatory Issues

International Legal Finance Association (ILFA) Statement in Opposition to Forced Disclosure Legislation

By Harry Moran and 4 others |

Today, the International Legal Finance Association is announcing its opposition to the Litigation Transparency Act of 2025, which would force public disclosure of all financing in civil cases in federal courts. 

The sweeping nature of the bill would harm small-scale inventors, startups, small and family-owned businesses, and individual Americans who partner with legal funders because they otherwise would not have the resources to assert their rights, protect their property, and defend their livelihoods.  This bill would force disclosure of the sensitive details of their legal strategies and is a blatant attempt to further tilt the legal system in favor of the biggest corporate players resulting in a dramatic reduction in civil litigation against them.  This bill would also partially nullify liability for America’s largest tech and insurance companies. 

Paul Kong, Executive Director, said: 

“The effect of the legislation is devastating to the economic health of our nation and the Rule of Law. The bill would harm small businesses that have been wronged by large corporations and are seeking redress in court. There should never be a financial barrier to entry to civil litigation, and if this law is enacted, that is exactly what will happen. Only the litigants with enough money to support large professional legal teams for months of litigation will have a chance to protect their intellectual property from Big Tech’s infringement or to force Big Insurance to pay rightful claims. It is no surprise that the US Chamber of Commerce, the country’s largest insurance industry groups, and Big Tech have expressed support for the bill, as they all stand to benefit from a system like that. They are eager to preserve their ability to wield massive legal teams and resources to bully those they have harmed. 

This bill is a harmful solution in search of a problem. Courts already have the authority to order disclosure of financing when relevant and are in the best position to determine the relevancy of any financing agreement to the merits of the litigation. In the overwhelming majority of cases, courts have held that the details of legal finance agreements are not relevant to the underlying merits of cases and should be protected rather than turned over to the opposition in litigation. 

The bill’s corporate champions are trying to scare up support by invoking the specter of malign foreign actors exploiting our legal system but they cannot cite any actual examples of this threat materializing, with good reason. As civil litigation experts have noted repeatedly, existing law, court rules, and ethical guidelines provide litigants ample ability to maintain control of their cases and ensure attorneys don’t breach their duties of loyalty and confidentiality. Courts and corporate defendants themselves are also equipped to guard against the release of sensitive information, including through the issuance of a protective order. Lawmakers should oppose this effort and instead stand with small businesses to defend our free enterprise system. 

ILFA opposes the Litigation Transparency Act and will seek to educate the Members of the Judiciary Committee and the House of Representatives on the dangers of this legislation and the true motives of its proponents.” 

About the International Legal Finance Association 

The International Legal Finance Association (ILFA) represents the global commercial legal finance community, and its mission is to engage, educate and influence legislative, regulatory and judicial landscapes as the voice of the commercial legal finance industry. It is the only global association of commercial legal finance companies and is an independent, non-profit trade association promoting the highest standards of operation and service for the commercial legal finance sector. ILFA has local chapter representation around the world. 

For more information, visit www.ILFA.com and find us on LinkedIn and X.

Commercial Legal Innovation

Howden Insurance Launches Low-Value Litigation Funding and ATE Facility

By Harry Moran and 4 others |

Although the funded cases that tend to attract the most attention are those that are valued in the tens or hundreds of millions of pounds, there is clearly still an appetite for legal funding aimed at smaller cases that require less capital and faster turnaround times.

In a post on LinkedIn, Mark Sands, Head of Insolvency at Apex Litigation Finance, announced the launch of a new low-value litigation funding and ATE facility: Virtus. The new facility is being launched by Howden Insurance Brokers, with Apex and Ignite Speciality Risk acting as exclusive providers of litigation funding and ATE insurance, respectively.

The Virtus facility is designed to provide law firms and their clients with quick access to legal funding up to £750,000, along with ATE insurance cover up to £100,000. Sands explains that this new product is aimed at clients looking to unlock small to medium size commercial claims. In order to meet these requirements, the Virtus facility offers guaranteed turnaround times including funding sign-off within 10 working days and an ATE insurance offer within 5 working days.

Sands directs any parties looking for more information or to start an application for funding to contact: Katie.Armstrong@HowdenGroup.com