Trending Now
Consumer

Free Conference on Recent Legislative Responses to Litigation Finance

By Harry Moran |

The Center on Civil Justice at New York University School of Law mission is dedicated to the U.S. civil justice system and the continued fulfillment of its purpose. The Center brings together the unmatched strengths of the NYU Law faculty in the fields of procedure and complex litigation with the sophisticated practitioners and judges who make up our Board of Advisers.  Together we endeavor to support our civil courts as a place for people to fairly and efficiently resolve their problems and access justice.

The Center on Civil Justice at NYU School of Law will host a one-day conference on October 28, 2024 on the subject of legislative efforts to regulate third-party legal funding with the goal of connecting the debates on key legal funding issues taking place in academia and among practitioners, lobbyists and legislators, in the US and in Europe.  

The conference will consist of three panels, each focusing on a different legal funding reform effort. These include U.S. legislative efforts to regulate commercial litigation financing and consumer legal funding, in addition to an examination of European and other international legislative attempts to regulate third-party funding. The bill sponsors will be invited to present, along with experts on the topics the bill covers.

The event will take place on October 28, 2024, from 9am – 3:30pm.  We encourage everyone to attend in-person at Greenberg Lounge of Vanderbilt Hall, 40 Washington Square South, NY, NY 10012.

For those who cannot do so, the event will also be livestreamed via Zoom.  A link will be sent out to everyone who RSVPs.

The event is free, and we will be applying for CLE credit. 

Register Here: https://forms.gle/Z5UuQcB2geNhRe7dA.

9:15 AM – 9:30 AM – Opening Remarks

9:30 AM – 11:00 AM – Panel 1: Disclosure of Commercial Litigation Financing Agreements

While much of the state legislation enacted on third-party litigation finance has focused on consumer legal funding, states and the federal government have begun to think about the regulation of commercial litigation funding as well.  Specifically, the issue of whether, under what circumstances, and to what extent to disclose commercial third-party funding has been one of the most significant policy questions facing the industry for years.   Legislation has been introduced or passed in West Virginia, Wisconsin, and US Congress regarding disclosure of commercial funding agreements, and we will discuss these bills and others and how they will impact the commercial funding landscape.

11:15 AM – 12:45 PM – Panel 2: New York A.115 – Consumer Funding

Much, if not most, state legislation focuses specifically on consumer legal funding and not commercial litigation financing.  New York State alone has five different such bills.  This panel chooses to focus on A.115, which has passed the New York State Senate but not the Assembly – the bill that has so far advanced the furthest.  This bill caps returns to funders at the military lending rate.  Other bills do not place such a cap at all but require full disclosure of the contract.  This panel will discuss what is the best way forward to regulate the product in New York and across the country.

12:45 PM – 1:30 PM – Lunch

1:30 PM – 3:00 PM – Panel 3: EU P9_TA (2022) 0308 – International Legislation

In 2022, the EU Parliament adopted a resolution to introduce legislation creating minimum standards for third-party funding in the EU.  The European Commission has yet to submit a formal proposal for the EU Parliament and European Commission to consider.  However, the principals outlined in the resolution highlight many significant discussion points within the industry and demonstrate the state of international regulation of the industry.

3:00 PM – 3:15 PM – Closing Remarks

RSVP for the event here: https://forms.gle/Z5UuQcB2geNhRe7dA.

About the author

Harry Moran

Harry Moran

Consumer

View All
Announcements Consumer

Legal Bay Presettlement Funding Reports Updates to Zantac Lawsuits

By Harry Moran |

Legal-Bay LLC, a leading pre settlement funding company, reports that November's $2.2 billion ruling against GlaxoSmithKline has still not been distributed to 80,000+ Zantac plaintiffs. The UK-based pharmaceutical company has been the target of numerous lawsuits for the past five years with plaintiffs alleging the popular heartburn medication causes cancer, and that the company failed to warn users that its main ingredient—ranitidine—may be a human carcinogen.

Testing last month determined how such dangerous levels of ranitidine ended up in the antacid product. As it turns out, impurities in the NDMA found in ranitidine increase when exposed to higher temps and humid conditions. Meaning that the Zantac may have been manufactured correctly, but when it was stored in a damp bathroom or glove compartment of a car, users themselves may have unwittingly triggered the very agent that caused their cancer. 

Chris Janish, CEO of Legal Bay, says, "GSK felt it was in the company's best interest to settle the lawsuits in order to appease shareholders rather than draw out litigation endlessly, especially considering they have been able to do so while providing no admission of liability. While we don't have an exact timeline for when payouts are expected to begin, we are nonetheless offering funding for Zantac plaintiffs while they wait."

To apply for a cash advance lawsuit loan from your anticipated GSK Zantac lawsuit settlement, please visit the company's website HERE or call 877.571.0405.   

There is no way to estimate final settlement amounts or how much each plaintiff's case will be worth. Similar case values have been determined based on extent/amount of injuries along with the level of merit to the case. Each case is unique, and many factors go into deciding final damages. For the Zantac lawsuit payouts, plaintiffs will fall into one of three tiers:

  • Tier I:

Tier 1 injuries can expect payouts in the $300,000 range.  Injuries in this tier include cancers of the stomach, prostate, pancreas, or breast.

  • Tier II:

Tier 2 injuries can expect payouts between $80,000 and 160,000 in most cases.  Injuries in this tier include cancers of the major organs like bladder, kidney, or liver.

  • Tier III:

Tier 3 injuries are looking at payouts anywhere between $20,000 and $60,000.  Injuries in this tier vary greatly, but to a lesser extent than Tier I or II.

The verdicts in these lawsuits are wildly inconsistent and entirely unpredictable, and Legal Bay says there are no guarantees of award amounts nor time frames for payouts just based on the sheer number of claims to process. Nevertheless, Legal-Bay is one of the few legal funding companies who are providing some financial relief to Zantac lawsuit plaintiffs and their families with risk-free, non-recourse cash advance settlement loans. They have been a leader in the mass tort and Qui Tam arena for over fifteen years and have vast experience within this space. These litigations are complex, and Legal Bay has the knowledge and understanding to help plaintiffs navigate the complicated waters of the legal system.

If you're a plaintiff in an active GSK Zantac lawsuit and need an immediate cash advance from your anticipated settlement, please visit the company's website HERE or call 877.571.0405 where agents are standing by to hear about your specific case. 

Legal-Bay is one of the best lawsuit loan companies when it comes to mass tort and Qui Tam litigations, and has a great reputation within the industry. Legal-Bay assists plaintiffs in all types of class action and mass tort lawsuits, including: Round Up, Hernia Mesh, IVC Filters, Essure, Exactech hip and knee recall, Sex Abuse cases, JUUL, and more.

Legal-Bay assists plaintiffs in all other types of lawsuits including personal injury, dog bites, motor vehicle accidents, medical malpractice, police brutality, unlawful incarceration, workplace discrimination, wrongful termination, and more.

Legal-Bay's loan for settlement funding programs are designed to provide immediate cash in advance of a plaintiff's anticipated monetary award. While it's common to refer to these legal funding requests as settlement loans, loans for settlements, law suit loans, loans for lawsuits, etc., the "lawsuit loan" funds are, in fact, non-recourse. That means there's no risk when it comes to loans in lawsuit settlements because there is no obligation to repay the money if the recipient loses their case. Therefore, terms like settlement loan, loans for lawsuit, loans on settlement, or lawsuit loan funds don't necessarily apply, as the "loan on lawsuit" isn't really a loan at all, but rather a stress-free cash advance.

Legal-Bay is known to many as the best lawsuit funding provider in the industry for their helpful and knowledgeable staff, low rates, and quick turnaround, sometimes within 24-48 hours once all documents have been received.

To apply right now for a loan settlement program, please visit the company's website HERE or call toll-free at: 877.571.0405 where agents are standing by to answer any questions.

Announcements Consumer

Legal-Bay Lawsuit Funding Announces Commercial Litigation/Breach of Contract Lawsuit Filed Against Developer Hart Lyman Companies

By Harry Moran |

Legal-Bay, a leading presettlement lawsuit funding company, announces a commercial litigation / breach of contract lawsuit filed against Hart Lyman Companies. The prominent Syracuse-based real estate developer was sued late Tuesday in New York State Supreme Court, Onondaga County. FILED: ONONDAGA COUNTY CLERK 01/07/2025 05:48 PM INDEX NO. 000134/2025

The plaintiff, Jonathon Geller, a longtime investor with Hart Lyman Companies, is suing for delinquent payments on investments and inspection of books and records of eight separate entities, which he alleges the companies have not complied with. Hart Lyman Companies is currently working on the largest development in central New York history, the Great Northern Mall, whose purchase was predicated upon its close proximity to the future site of Micron Technologies. Micron has committed $100 billion toward developing multiple chip fabricating facilities in Clay, NY. The plaintiff is also an investor in the Great Northern Mall project.

The plaintiff is represented by the LAZARE POTTER GIACOVAS & MOYLE LLP law firm in New York City by Robert A. Giacovas, Esq.

Chris Janish, CEO of Legal-Bay, commented, "Our firm is familiar with breach of contract and other commercial litigation such as this, and we do our best to work with plaintiffs who are having financial difficulties litigating matters against larger defendants.  Cases of this nature can take a long time to work their way through the courts and recover funds, regardless of the nature of the claims.  Due to the importance of the Great Northern Mall project for residents of central New York, we will continue to monitor updates of this case."

If you're looking for pre-settlement cash from your commercial litigation lawsuit or need a cash advance from your anticipated settlement for any other type of lawsuit, please visit the company's website HERE or call 877.571.0405 where agents are standing by to hear about your specific case. 

Legal-Bay funds commercial litigation and breach of contract cases, as well as many other types of lawsuits such as wrongful imprisonment, whistleblower or Qui-Tam, wrongful termination, personal injury, slips and falls, car, boat, or construction accidents, medical malpractice, wrongful death, dog bites, police brutality, sexual assault, sexual abuse, judgment or verdict on appeal, contract dispute, False Claims Act, patent litigation, copyright infringement, and many more. Legal-Bay has recently secured additional capital for these and other types of cases, and encourages plaintiffs or attorneys that have been denied funding in the past to apply with Legal-Bay.

Legal-Bay's loan for settlement funding programs are designed to provide immediate cash in advance of a plaintiff's anticipated monetary award. While it's common to refer to these legal funding requests as settlement loans, loans for settlements, lawsuit loans, loans for lawsuits, etc., the "lawsuit loan" funds are, in fact, non-recourse. That means there's no risk when it comes to loans in lawsuit settlements because there is no obligation to repay the money if the recipient loses their case. Therefore, terms like settlement loan, loans for lawsuit, loans on settlement, or law suit loan funds don't necessarily apply, as the "loan on lawsuit" isn't really a loan at all, but rather a stress-free cash advance.

Legal-Bay is known to many as the best lawsuit funding provider in the industry for their helpful and knowledgeable staff, and one of the best lawsuit loan companies overall for their low rates and quick turnaround, sometimes within 24-48 hours once all documents have been received.To apply right now for a loan settlement program, please visit the company's website HERE or call toll-free at: 877.571.0405 where agents are standing by to answer any questions.

Consumer

Litigation Funding Found to be “Not Relevant” in E. Jean Carroll’s Sexual Abuse and Defamation Case Against Donald Trump

By John Freund |

The Second Circuit upheld the $5 million verdict in Carroll v. Trump, rejecting President Trump’s claims of trial court errors, including the handling of litigation funding evidence. Trump’s legal team argued that litigation funding for E. Jean Carroll’s lawsuit, provided by an anonymous nonprofit, was relevant to her credibility and potential bias. The court disagreed, emphasizing that such evidence had minimal probative value.

As reported in Reason.com, the court noted that Carroll’s case was primarily taken on a contingency fee basis, with supplemental funding obtained by her legal team in 2020. Carroll had little involvement with the funding arrangement, learning about it after the fact and having no subsequent discussions with her counsel about it for years. The appellate court agreed with the trial court’s finding that Carroll’s lack of engagement with the funding made it irrelevant to assessing her credibility.

Trump’s team had argued the funding demonstrated bias or a politically motivated agenda, but the court dismissed this, highlighting that Carroll publicly accused Trump of sexual assault long before the funding was secured. Additionally, Carroll and her key witnesses had openly acknowledged their political opposition to Trump, making the funder’s potential political affiliations redundant in establishing bias.

The court emphasized that litigation funding rarely impacts credibility and that introducing such evidence risks unfair prejudice and jury distraction. This decision reinforces the judiciary's cautious approach to litigation funding disclosure in trials.