News and analysis dedicated to the commercial litigation funding sector including regulatory issues, case developments, funding activities, and more.

The European Litigation Funders Association (ELFA) is pleased to announce that Dutch collective claim manager and aggregator ClaimShare, has joined ELFA as an associate member. 

“ClaimShare‘s mission is to support people and SMEs that have suffered harm and seek redress from corporate wrongdoers. ClaimShare does this by bundling their claims and providing professional services to organizations that represent the claimants’ interests. Seeking the appropriate litigation funder is a crucial part of that service and for access to justice in general. For years, ClaimShare has advocated the necessity and added value of a dedicated litigation funding association in the EU. The establishment of ELFA is crucial to better inform clients, the legal industry and policy makers in the EU of the essential role litigation funding plays and its mechanics, as well as develop and foster best practices”, said Dirk Jan van den Broek, Managing Director of ClaimShare. 

Omni Bridgeway‘s Managing Director and ELFA Chairman, Wieger Wielinga, expressed his enthusiasm about ClaimShare joining as an associate member. He stated, “ELFA is delighted to have ClaimShare on board. With Dirk Jan and the broader ClaimShare team, we gain a wealth of experience accumulated through years of assisting claimants and interest organizations, specifically in the European Union in obtaining the redress they might not have otherwise achieved. Their perspective as a claims manager and aggregator will significantly contribute to our organization’s mission and benefit the entire industry.” 

About The European Litigation Funders Association: 

ELFA was founded by three leading litigation funders with a European footprint, and today includes almost all European litigation funders. ELFA, was established to serve as the European voice of the commercial litigation funding industry. With the objective of representing the industry’s interests before governmental bodies, international organizations and professional associations, ELFA also aims to act as a clearinghouse and reference for relevant information, research and data regarding the uses and applications of commercial legal finance within the European continent. ELFA aims to be inclusive for all professional litigation funders of larger or smaller size and to allow specific contributing market participants and academics as associate members. 

About ClaimShare: 

ClaimShare exists to support individuals and interest groups to set up and manage class actions and group actions advancing equitable access to justice. ClaimShare has successfully initiated several well-known impactful claims, helping its clients obtain legal redress regarding leaking silicone breast implants, wrongful electricity pricing and metals fraud.

Jeffrey T. Zaino, Esq. is the Vice President of the Commercial Division of the American Arbitration Association in New York. He oversees administration of the large, complex commercial caseload, user outreach, and panel of commercial neutrals in New York. He joined the Association in 1990. Mr. Zaino is dedicated to promoting ADR methods and services.

His professional affiliations include the American Bar Association (Dispute Resolution, Litigation, and Business Law Sections), Connecticut Bar Association, District of Columbia Bar Association, New York State Bar Association (Dispute Resolution Section – Executive Committee Member and Chair of the Blog Committee; Commercial & Federal Litigation Section, Chair of the Arbitration and ADR Committee), New York City Bar Association (Member of the Arbitration Committee and Affiliate Member of the ADR Committee), Board of Advisors of the Scheinman Institute on Conflict Resolution, New York Law School ADR Advisory Committee, American Bankruptcy Institute, and Westchester County Bar Association.

He has also written and published extensively on the topics of election reform and ADR, including several podcasts with the ABA, TalksOnLaw, and Corporate Counsel Business, and has appeared on CNN, MSNBC, and Bloomberg to discuss national election reform efforts and the Help America Vote Act.  He was deemed a 2018 Alternative Dispute Resolution Champion by the National Law Journal and received awards for his ADR work from the National Academy of Arbitrators, Region 2 and Long Island Labor and Employment Relations Association, New York State Bar Association (Commercial and Federal Litigation and Dispute Resolution Sections).

Company Name and Description: The not-for-profit American Arbitration Association^® (AAA^®)-International Centre for Dispute Resolution^® (ICDR^®) is the largest private global provider of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) services in the world.

With that comes enormous responsibility, which the AAA-ICDR^® embraces. Its work lessens the load of a tremendously overburdened court system. Its efforts ease the financial hardships of those shattered by natural disasters. The foundation it established supports access to justice for all. 

The AAA-ICDR has a core dedication to service and particularly to education. It would be gratifying to focus on teaching people to stay out of disputes; however, since that is not a realistic objective in today’s world, the AAA-ICDR provides fair, rational, faster, and less adversarial means to handle the disputes that inevitably arise. 

Contrary to a common misperception, arbitration is confidential—not secretive. Parties are free to talk about their cases; it is the AAA-ICDR and the arbitrators who are bound to keeping parties’ confidences, similar to a judge and jury. 

Company Website: www.adr.org

Year Founded:  1926

Headquarters:  NYC

Area of Focus:  Commercial, Construction, Consumer, Employment, Government, International, and Labor

Member Quote: I look forward to working with the members of the Legal Funding Journal to collaborate on various efforts, including the promotion of arbitration and mediation.

Genevievette Walker-Lightfoot brings extensive expertise in compliance, risk management, and regulatory affairs. As the Managing Member of The Law Offices of Genevievette Walker-Lightfoot, P.C., she ensures SEC-regulated entities adhere to compliance standards. With ties to FINRA and previous positions at the Federal Reserve Board and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, she has been listed among The Hedge Fund Journal’s Top 50 Women in Hedge Funds.

Hedonova, established in 2020, specializes in alternative investments, encompassing a diverse range of assets such as startups, real estate, fine art, carbon credits, and more. Hedonova offers a single fund structure that allows shareholders to invest without the burden of managing the day-to-day distribution of their investments. Hedonova’s mission is to make alternative investments accessible to all.

Below is our LFJ Conversation with Genevievette Walker-Lightfoot:

1. Hedonova has a unique business model. Can you explain how the fund works?

Certainly, the Hedonova fund operates on a single fund structure, which means that instead of offering multiple funds with different risk profiles, we consolidate various alternative investments into one accessible option for investors. This simplifies decision-making for our clients, as they don’t have to navigate multiple investment choices. Within this single fund, we strategically diversify across different asset classes, such as startups, real estate, art, litigation finance, and more. By spreading investments across diverse assets, we aim to manage risk effectively and potentially enhance returns for our investors.

2. How do you make it possible for investors worldwide to access alternative investments?

We prioritize global access to alternative investments through several means. Firstly, we leverage user-friendly online platforms, making it easy for investors worldwide to explore and invest in our fund. Hedonova has established and operates four feeder funds within its international framework across various jurisdictions, each meticulously structured under the relevant local laws. Additionally, we establish strategic partnerships with financial institutions across different regions, enabling us to reach a wider audience. Through these partnerships, we ensure that investors from various parts of the world can seamlessly participate in our fund, tapping into the opportunities offered by alternative investments. 

3. How are you adapting your business to the new regulatory requirements of the SEC’s Private Adviser Rule?

Adapting to the new regulatory requirements of the SEC’s Private Adviser Rule is a key focus for us. We’re enhancing our compliance measures and transparency practices to align with the regulatory framework. This involves thorough reviews of our operations and investment processes to ensure compliance. Additionally, we’re strengthening our communication channels with investors, providing them with clear and transparent information about our fund and its compliance with regulatory requirements. We aim to maintain trust and confidence in our operations by prioritizing investor protection and regulatory compliance.

4. Are there unique challenges in the Litigation Funding space for Hedonova?

Yes, the Litigation Funding space presents its own set of unique challenges. One significant challenge is assessing the financial viability of litigation cases. We carefully evaluate factors such as potential costs associated with litigation, the likelihood of successful resolution, and the estimated timeline for outcomes. Maintaining transparent communication with all parties involved, including law firms and plaintiffs, is crucial. We navigate these challenges by implementing rigorous evaluation processes and fostering open dialogue with our partners, ensuring alignment of interests and effective management of risks.

5. What are the advantages for investors in litigation finance?

Investors stand to gain several advantages from investing in litigation finance. Firstly, it offers the potential for high returns, as successful litigation cases can result in significant settlements or awards. Additionally, litigation finance typically involves shorter investment horizons than traditional investments, allowing investors to realize returns within a shorter timeframe. Moreover, litigation finance often exhibits a low correlation with traditional markets, providing diversification benefits to investors. By incorporating litigation finance into their portfolios, investors can access alternative sources of income and enhance overall portfolio resilience.

6. What are the types of litigation finance cases that Hedonova has invested in?

Hedonova has invested in various types of litigation cases across different sectors. These include commercial lawsuits, intellectual property disputes, class action lawsuits, and more. Each case undergoes a thorough evaluation process, where we assess its financial viability, the strength of legal arguments, and the expertise of the legal team involved. By diversifying across different litigation cases, we aim to spread risk and maximize potential returns for our investors.

7. How can investors use litigation finance to diversify their portfolios?

Investors can utilize litigation finance to diversify their portfolios by capitalizing on its non-correlation with traditional assets, as returns from legal cases are often unaffected by economic fluctuations. Diversification within the litigation finance asset class itself spreads risk across various cases with different risk profiles, mitigating the impact of any single case’s outcome. With the potential for high returns and exposure to alternative assets beyond stocks and bonds, litigation finance offers a unique avenue for portfolio diversification. Additionally, investors gain access to specialized legal expertise and thorough due diligence processes conducted by litigation finance firms, enhancing their investment decisions. As the litigation finance industry matures, it presents opportunities for long-term growth, making it an attractive option for investors seeking to broaden their investment horizons.

CaseMark AI, a pioneer in legal generative AI workflows, today announced the closing of a $1.7 million seed funding round led by Gradient Ventures, Google’s AI-focused seed fund. Additional participation came from Rex Salisbury‘s Cambrian, Ride Home AI Fund and Alumni Ventures. The funding will drive the company’s mission to help legal professionals benefit from the efficiency and productivity of generative AI.

CaseMark’s AI-powered legal workflows address automating time-consuming tasks like document summarization, research, and legal analysis. This frees up valuable time for legal professionals to focus on high-value activities such as client strategy and casework.

CaseMark’s platform is modular, web-based, and easy-to-deploy. Unlike legacy legal tech, it seamlessly integrates into existing legal workflows such as deposition summaries or discovery responses, minimizing disruption and maximizing user adoption. The built-in chat tool allows legal professionals to query their case content in a secure, privacy first environment. 

“We’re the AI easy button that won’t get attorneys in trouble,” said Scott Kveton, CEO of CaseMark. “Hours spent summarizing take minutes now. That time saved can be reclaimed to work on legal strategy,” said Kveton, highlighting the platform’s efficiency gains.

“The rise of generative AI is transforming the legal landscape. Attorneys are now leveraging AI tools to sift through vast amounts of documents and automate time-consuming tasks like summarizing lengthy court transcripts. Casemark is at the forefront of this movement, offering an innovative solution for quickly and accurately generating summaries of depositions, cases, and trials,” said Denise Teng, Investor at Gradient Ventures. “Casemark’s platform has the potential to streamline legal work, making it more efficient and cost-effective for everyone from solo practitioners, large law firms to legal tech companies. We’re proud to support Scott and his team as they redefine legal tech.”

“For generative AI to succeed in legal workflows, it needs to perform reliably and cost efficiently. With CaseMark’s LLM-agnostic architecture and mixture-of-experts approach, they can deliver best-in-class results at a fraction of the cost of their well-funded competitors. It’s game on.” stated Chris Messina, inventor of the hashtag and GP at the Ride Home AI Fund.

The seed funding will accelerate CaseMark’s product development, expand its team of AI and legal experts, and drive adoption of its AI-powered legal workflows among law firms, legaltech companies, court reporting and litigation services firms.

“CaseMark has demonstrated incredible speed in bringing a high quality product to market, delivering real value for their clients. I look forward to seeing how continued enhancements in underlying models allows the team to do even more.” said Rex Salisbury. 

The CaseMark Workflow API enables access to all of CaseMark’s AI-powered workflows via a white-label integration for legal tech companies and litigation support firms. Companies can leverage the AI-as-infrastructure service provided by CaseMark to increase time-to-market and maximize revenue for the most common attorney use cases.

ABOUT GRADIENT VENTURES

Gradient Ventures has been investing at the forefront of artificial intelligence since 2017. We are led by former founders, technical experts, and domain specialists, who know how to take an idea to product-market-fit and beyond. Gradient Ventures is headquartered in the San Francisco Bay Area. For more information, visit www.gradient.com.

ABOUT CASEMARKCaseMark is a pioneer in the legaltech industry, dedicated to transforming the way legal professionals work. Our AI-driven workflow platform streamlines document creation, research, and workflow management for law firms, litigators, and support services. With a focus on privacy, security, and innovation, CaseMark empowers legal professionals to maximize efficiency and deliver exceptional outcomes for their clients. Learn more at www.casemark.ai.

Nakiki SE, in future Legal Finance Holding SE, announces 3 new litigation financing agreements:

Real estate purchase agreement:

The seller of non-EU real estate with a value of EUR 10 million suffered damages of approximately EUR 2.3 million as a result of a cancelled property purchase agreement. Legal Finance entered into a litigation funding agreement with the seller to pursue the claim.

Sports car accident:

A policyholder suffered damage in a serious car accident and the insurance company refused to pay the claim for approximately EUR 700,000. Legal Finance entered into a litigation funding agreement with the policyholder to pursue the claim.

Loan agreements:

A borrower refused to repay business loans totalling approximately EUR 550,000. Legal Finance entered into a litigation funding agreement with the lender to enforce the outstanding payments.

The total amount in dispute of the new litigation financing agreements is approximately EUR 3.5 million (excluding costs and interest). The option volume is approximately EUR 1.5 million.

Additional cases are under review.

Burford Capital, the leading global finance firm focused on law, is expected to join the broad-market Russell 3000® and small-cap Russell 2000® Indexes at the conclusion of the 2024 Russell US Indexes annual reconstitution, effective after the US market opens on July 1, 2024, according to a preliminary list of additions posted on May 24, 2024. Burford is the first legal finance firm to be listed on the New York Stock Exchange and the first legal finance firm expected to join the Russell 3000® and 2000® Indexes. Legal finance is an emerging asset class generally uncorrelated to market conditions or the performance of the overall economy.

Burford’s inclusion in the Russell 3000® and 2000® Indexes reinforces its continued growth both with its investors and with its clients, which include Fortune 500 companies and many of the world’s largest law firms. Burford, which celebrates its 15^th anniversary in October 2024, helps clients shift the cost of their commercial disputes as well as manage the risk and optimize the timing of the often-significant cash flows associated with pending claims, judgments and awards. The company has a multi-billion dollar portfolio, and in 2023, a Burford-funded case against Argentina involving the renationalization of Argentina’s oil company, YPF, resulted in the largest judgment in the history of the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, with the court awarding plaintiffs approximately $16 billion in damages.

Christopher Bogart, CEO of Burford Capital, said: “Since its founding in 2009, Burford has deployed billions of dollars to the business of law, and we’re continuing to see growing demand from CFOs, GCs and other business leaders who recognize that they can use legal finance to turn the legal department from a cost center to a capital source, including a recent $325 million Group-wide commitment with a Fortune 50 company. Joining the Russell 3000® and 2000® Indexes is an exciting moment for Burford, and we are proud to continue on a trajectory of growth and increasing visibility to clients and investors alike.”

Russell indexes are widely used by investment managers and institutional investors for index funds and as benchmarks for active investment strategies. According to the data as of the end of December 2023, about $10.5 trillion in assets are benchmarked against the Russell US indexes.

About Burford Capital

Burford Capital is the leading global finance and asset management firm focused on law. Its businesses include litigation finance and risk management, asset recovery and a wide range of legal finance and advisory activities. Burford is publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE: BUR) and the London Stock Exchange (LSE: BUR), and it works with companies and law firms around the world from its offices in New York, London, Chicago, Washington, DC, Singapore, Dubai, Sydney and Hong Kong.
 
For more information, please visit www.burfordcapital.com.
 
This announcement does not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy any ordinary shares or other securities of Burford.

Forward-looking statements

This announcement contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 21E of the US Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, regarding assumptions, expectations, projections, intentions and beliefs about future events. These statements are intended as “forward-looking statements”. In some cases, predictive, future-tense or forward-looking words such as “aim”, “anticipate”, “believe”, “continue”, “could”, “estimate”, “expect”, “forecast”, “guidance”, “intend”, “may”, “plan”, “potential”, “predict”, “projected”, “should” or “will” or the negative of such terms or other comparable terminology are intended to identify forward-looking statements, but are not the exclusive means of identifying such statements. By their nature, forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors because they relate to events and depend on circumstances that may or may not occur in the future. Burford cautions that forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and are based on numerous assumptions, expectations, projections, intentions and beliefs and that Burford’s actual results of operations, including its financial position and liquidity, and the development of the industry in which it operates, may differ materially from (and be more negative than) those made in, or suggested by, the forward-looking statements contained in this announcement. Except as required by law, Burford undertakes no obligation to update or revise the forward-looking statements contained in this announcement, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

A top-tier litigation finance firm has achieved a significant milestone by becoming a member of the prestigious European Litigation Funders Association (ELFA).

This development marks a strategic move for Nera Capital as it continues to solidify its position as a key player in the global litigation funding market.

With its headquarters in Dublin, along with offices in Manchester and The Netherlands, the company has earned a reputation for delivering innovative financial solutions and cutting-edge technology across a diverse range of claim types.

The company’s portfolio includes high-volume consumer disbursement funding in the UK and substantial commercial claims in both Europe and the USA.

This strategic membership in ELFA underscores Nera Capital’s commitment to fostering ethical and effective litigation funding practices.

The ELFA is a collective of like-minded professionals from the litigation funding industry whose management committee is formed by representatives from the original founding companies, Deminor, Nivalion and Omni Bridgeway.

To become a member, firms need to have demonstrated excellence in the sector and a proven track record of deploying a significant amount of capital into the market.

Aisling Byrne, Director at Nera Capital, expressed her delight at this milestone, stating: “We are very pleased to join the European Litigation Funders Association.

“As a member, we look forward to collaborating with industry peers, sharing our wealth of experience, and contributing to the advancement of ethical and effective litigation funding practices across Europe.

“It positions us to advocate for transparency and promote higher industry standards that benefit all stakeholders involved. We believe our involvement will drive positive change and reinforce the essential role of litigation funding in delivering access to justice.”

Nera Capital’s membership in ELFA comes at a pivotal time when the litigation funding market is experiencing rapid growth.

By aligning with ELFA, Nera Capital is poised to play a crucial role in shaping the future of the industry, and the importance of litigation funding.

Wieger Wielinga, Managing Director of Omni Bridgeway and Chairman of ELFA, welcomed the company’s membership, noting the significance of their inclusion:

“With its roots in Ireland, the only Common Law EU country, Nera Capital operates in several EU jurisdictions as well as the UK.

“ELFA is thrilled to have another experienced funder on board, further enabling us to develop best practices for assisting claimants, insolvency trustees and consumer organisations and law firms across Europe.

“The addition of Nera to ELFA will also enhance our ability to advocate for the funding industry and its invaluable role in delivering access to justice across Europe.”

About Nera Capital:

·        Established in 2011, Nera Capital is a specialist funding provider to law firms.

·        Provides Law Firm Lend funding across diverse claim portfolios in both the Consumer and Commercial sector.

• Headquartered in Dublin, the firm also has offices in Manchester and The Netherlands.

·        Nera Capital is dedicated to facilitating the setup of class actions and group actions to promote equitable access to justice for individuals and interest groups. With a proven track record, Nera Capital has spearheaded numerous impactful claims, empowering clients to achieve legal redress in cases such as Housing Disrepair Claims, where vulnerable claimants lack the means to address their grievances effectively. Additionally, Nera Capital has played a pivotal role in supporting claims like the Trucking Cartel case in Europe, assisting in exposing evidence of anti-competitive behaviour by manufacturers. Through its strategic interventions and advanced AI capabilities, Nera Capital continues to champion fairness and accountability in the legal landscape. 

·       www.nerecapital.com

About The European Litigation Funders Association (ELFA):

·        ELFA was founded by three leading litigation funders with a European footprint and today includes the vast majority of EU based litigation funders. ELFA was established to serve as the voice of the commercial litigation funding industry operating from within the EU member states. With the objective of representing the industry’s interests before governmental bodies, international organisations and professional associations, ELFA aims to act as a clearinghouse and reference for relevant information, research and data regarding the uses and applications of commercial legal finance within the European continent. ELFA aims to be inclusive for all professional litigation funders of larger or smaller size and to allow specific contributing market participants and academics as associate members.

·        www.elfassociation.eu

Tamar is an underwriter in the Political Risk division at Mosaic Insurance and, among other things, responsible for developing Mosaic’s Arbitration Award Default Insurance (AADI) worldwide after previously supporting transactional liability division. In prior positions, she worked as a senior lawyer at JSC Georgian State Electrosystem in Georgia, representing the company in the European Union, and later, as an associate at Fridman Law Firm PLLC in New York. She started her career at Georgia’s Ministry of Economy & Sustainable Development, where she represented the government in courts, with a particular focus on complex commercial litigation.

Mosaic Insurance is a global specialty insurer with exceptional expertise, a focus on complex products, and an award-winning, digitized operating model. Mosaic Insurance underwrites for trade clients alongside we own Lloyd’s Syndicate 1609—offering capacity and custom service across seven lines of business in seven countries.

Company Website: https://www.mosaicinsurance.com/

Year Founded:  2021

Headquarters:  Bermuda

Area of Focus:  Arbitration Award Default Insurance Product

Member Quote: We believe that our new product revolutionizes the landscape for litigation funders investing in international arbitration, providing funds with certainty and effectively managing the value of their investments.

The following post was contributed by Jeff Manley, Chief Operating Officer of Armadillo Litigation Funding. 

Mass tort litigation is a high-stakes world, one where the pursuit of justice is inextricably linked with financial resources and risk management. In this complex ecosystem, two financial pillars stand out: bank lending and alternative litigation finance. For attorneys and their financial partners in mass torts, choosing the right financial strategy can mean the difference between success and stagnation.

The Evolving Financial Landscape for Mass Tort Attorneys

Gone are the days when a powerful legal argument alone could secure the means to wage a war against industrial giants. Today, financial acumen is as critical to a law firm’s success as legal prowess. For mass tort attorneys, funding large-scale litigations is akin to orchestrating a multifaceted campaign with the potential for astronomical payouts, but also the very real costs that come with such undertakings.

Under the lens of the courtroom, the financing of mass tort cases presents a unique set of challenges. These cases often require substantial upfront capital and can extend over years, if not decades. In such an environment, agility, sustainability, and risk management emerge as strategic imperatives.

Navigating these waters demands a deep understanding of two pivotal financing models: traditional bank lending and the more contemporary paradigm of third-party litigation finance.

The Need for Specialized Financial Solutions in Mass Tort Litigation

The financial demands of mass tort litigation are unique. They necessitate solutions that are as flexible as they are formidable, capable of weathering the uncertainty of litigation outcomes. Portfolio risk management, a concept well-established in the investment world, has found its parallel in the legal arena, where it plays a pivotal role in driving growth and longevity for law firms.

The overarching goal for mass tort practices is to structure their financial arrangements in such a way that enables not just the funding of current cases but the foresight to invest in future opportunities. In this context, the question of bank lending versus alternative asset class litigation finance is more than transactional—it’s transformational.

Understanding Bank Lending

Banks have long been the bedrock of corporate financing, offering stability and a familiar process. While bank lending presents several advantages, such as the potential for lower interest rates in favorable economic environments, it also comes with significant caveats. The traditional model often involves stringent loan structures, personal guarantees, and an inflexibility that can constrain the scalability of funding when litigation timelines shift or case resolutions become protracted.

For attorneys seeking immediate capital, interest-only lines of credit can be appealing, providing a temporary reprieve on principal payments. However, the long-term financial impact and personal liability underpinning these loans cannot be overlooked.

Exploring Third-Party Litigation Finance

On the flip side, third-party litigation finance has emerged as a beacon of adaptability within the legal financing landscape. By eschewing traditional collateral requirements and personal guarantees, this model reduces the personal financial risk for attorneys. More significantly, it does so while tailoring financing terms to individual cases and firm needs, thus improving the alignment between funding structures and litigation timelines.

Litigation financiers also bring a wealth of experience and industry-specific knowledge to the table. They are partners in the truest sense, offering strategic foresight, risk management tools, and a shared goal in the litigation’s success.

Interest Rates and Financial Terms

The choice between bank lending and third-party litigation finance often hinges on the amount of attainable capital, interest rates, and the terms, conditions, and covenants of the loans. These differences can significantly influence the overall cost of financing and the strategic financial planning for mass tort litigation.

Bank Lending: Traditional bank loans typically offer lower initial interest rates, which can be attractive for short-term financing needs. However, these rates are almost always variable and linked to broader economic indicators, such as the prime rate. Banks are very conservative in every aspect of underwriting and the commitments they offer.

Third-Party Litigation Finance: In contrast, third-party litigation lenders often require a multiple payback, such as 2x or 3x the original amount borrowed. Some third-party lenders also offer floating rate loans tied to SOFR, but the interest costs are meaningfully higher than those of banks. The trade-off is greater access to capital. Third-party lenders, deeply entrenched in industry nuances, are generally willing to lend substantially larger amounts of capital. For attorneys managing long-duration cases, this variability introduces a layer of financial uncertainty. If a loan has a floating rate and the duration of the underlying torts is materially extended, the actual borrowing cost can skyrocket, negatively impacting the overall returns of a final settlement. This is an incredibly important factor to understand both at the outset of a transaction and during the initial stages of capital deployment.

Similarly, the maturity, terms, and conditions can differ drastically between bank-sourced loans and those from third-party lenders, with no standard list of boilerplate terms for comparison—making a knowledgeable financial partner key to facilitating the best fit for the law firm. Two standard features of a bank credit facility are that the entire portfolio of all law firm assets is usually required to secure the loan, regardless of size, and an unbreakable personal guarantee further secures the entire credit facility. Both of these points are potentially negotiable with a third-party lender. Bank loans are almost always one-year facilities with the bank having an explicit right to reassess their interest in maintaining a credit facility with the law firm every 12 months. In contrast, third-party lenders typically enter into a credit facility with a commitment for 4-5 years, with terms becoming bespoke beyond these basics.

Loan Structures Under Scrutiny

The rigidity of bank loan structures, particularly notice provisions and speed of access, contrasts with the fluidity of third-party financiers’ offerings. The ability to negotiate terms based on case outcomes, as afforded by the alternative financing model, represents a paradigm shift in financial planning that has redefined the playbook for mass tort investors.

Risk at Its Core

The linchpin of this comparison is risk management. Banks often require a traditional, property-based collateral, which serves as a blunt instrument for risk reduction in the context of litigation. Third-party financiers, conversely, indulge in sophisticated evaluations and often adopt models of shared risk, where their fortunes are inversely tied to those of the litigants.

Support Beyond Capital

A crucial divergence between bank loans and alternative finance is the depth of support provided. The former confines its assistance to financial matters, while the latter, through its specialized knowledge, contributes significantly to strategic case management, risk assessment, and valuation, essentially elevating itself to the level of a silent partner in the legal endeavor. Furthermore, litigation funders (unlike banks), are often prepared to extend multiple installments of capital, reflecting a level of risk tolerance and industry insight that banks typically do not offer.

Case Studies and Success Stories

The case for alternative litigation finance is perhaps best illustrated through the experiences of attorneys who have successfully navigated the inextricable link between finance and litigation. The Litigation Finance Survey Report highlights the resounding recommendation from attorneys who have used third-party financing, with nearly all expressing a willingness to repeat the process and recommend it to peers.

This empirical evidence underscores the viability and efficacy of alternative financing models, showcasing how they can bolster the financial position of a firm and, consequently, its ability to take on new cases and grow its portfolio.

The Role of Litigation Finance Partners

When considering third-party litigation finance, the choice of partner is just as important as the decision to explore this path. Seasoned financiers offer more than just capital; they become an extension of the firm’s strategic muscle, sharing in risks and rewards to galvanize a litigation (and practice) forward.

Cultivating these partnerships is an investment in expertise and a recognition of the unique challenges presented by mass tort litigation. It is an integral part of modernizing the approach to case management, one that ultimately leads to a sustainable and robust financial framework.

For mass tort attorneys, the strategic use of finance can unlock the latent potential in their caseloads, transforming high-risk ventures into opportunities for growth and success. By carefully weighing the merits of traditional bank lending against the agility of third-party litigation financing, attorneys can carve out a strategic path that not only secures the necessary capital but also empowers them to manage risks and drive profitability.

One truth remains immutable: those who recognize the need for financial innovation and risk management will be the torchbearers for the future of mass tort litigators, where the scales of justice are balanced by a firm and strategic hand anchored in the principles of modern finance.