Trending Now
Community Spotlights

Member Spotlight: Rebecca K. Berrebi

By Rebecca Berrebi |
August 5, 2024

Member Spotlight: Rebecca K. Berrebi

Rebecca Berrebi is the CEO and Founder of Avenue 33, LLC, a full service, litigation finance consultancy that provides brokerage, strategic advisory and recruiting services. She handles all types of matters within the litigation finance industry from single case financings to law firm portfolios to insured structured credit matters.  Rebecca has worked in the litigation finance industry since 2016, and her background as a private money transactional lawyer and funder allows her to serve clients with both legal acumen and keen business insight. 

Previously, she was the Head of Corporate Affairs at a leading litigation finance fund manager where she oversaw investments and served on many boards and committees, including of Eco Oro Minerals Corp. (CSE: EOM).  Rebecca graduated from Duke University, after which she worked in the political affairs and public relations industry.  She later obtained her law degree from Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, and practiced as a private equity M&A lawyer at Kirkland & Ellis LLP and at a global private equity fund. 

Company Name and Description:   Avenue 33, LLC serves litigants, funders, law firms and investors in addressing and closing the litigation finance knowledge and communications gaps in order to facilitate a more seamless, efficient and successful financing process – from outset to outcome.

Often even sophisticated parties come to a “dispute finance” matter with varying backgrounds, underlying understandings and assumptions. With information equality, alignment of interests, harmonization of expectations and clarity of process, the opportunities for maximizing positive outcomes and minimizing contention substantially increases for all stakeholders. Avenue 33 can provide guidance, strategic advice and support leading to efficient value optimization.

Company Website: www.avenue33llc.com

Year Founded:  2020

Headquarters:  Westchester, NY

Area of Focus:  Advising and brokering all types of litigation finance related matters

Member Quote: In this opaque market, visibility into trends and appetites of the players saves lawyers, clients, funds and all stakeholders time and money.  Experienced, high-quality brokers create value for individual deals as well as add credibility to the litigation finance industry generally.

About the author

Rebecca Berrebi

Rebecca Berrebi

Commercial

View All
Commercial Regulatory Issues

Malaysia Launches Modern Third-Party Funding Regime for Arbitration

By John Freund |

Malaysia has officially overhauled its legal framework for third-party funding in arbitration, marking a significant development in the country’s dispute finance landscape. Effective 1 January 2026, two key instruments, the Arbitration (Amendment) Act 2024 (Act A1737) and the Code of Practice for Third Party Funding 2026, came into force with the aim of modernising regulation and improving access to justice.

An article in ICLG explains that the amended Arbitration Act introduces a dedicated chapter on third-party funding, creating Malaysia’s first comprehensive statutory foundation for funding arrangements in arbitration. The reforms abolish the long-standing common law doctrines of maintenance and champerty in the arbitration context, removing a historical barrier that could render funding agreements unenforceable on public policy grounds.

The legislation also introduces mandatory disclosure requirements, obliging parties to reveal the existence of funding arrangements and the identity of funders in both domestic and international arbitrations seated in Malaysia. These changes bring Malaysia closer to established regional arbitration hubs that already recognise and regulate third-party funding.

Alongside the legislative amendments, the Code of Practice for Third Party Funding sets out ethical standards and best practices for funders operating in Malaysia. The Code addresses issues such as marketing conduct, the need for funded parties to receive independent legal advice, capital adequacy expectations, the management of conflicts of interest, and rules around termination of funding arrangements. While the Code is not directly enforceable, arbitral tribunals and courts may take a funder’s compliance into account when relevant issues arise during proceedings.

The Legal Affairs Division of the Prime Minister’s Department has indicated that this combined framework is intended to strike a balance between encouraging responsible third-party funding and improving transparency in arbitration. The reforms also respond to concerns raised by high-profile disputes where funding arrangements were not disclosed, highlighting the perceived need for clearer rules.

Commercial

ProLegal Unveils Full-Stack Legal Support Beyond Traditional Funding

By John Freund |

ProLegal, formerly operating as Pro Legal Funding, has announced a strategic rebrand and expansion that reflects a broader vision for its role in the legal services ecosystem. After nearly a decade in the legal finance market, the company is repositioning itself not simply as a litigation funder, but as a comprehensive legal support platform designed to address persistent structural challenges facing plaintiffs and law firms.

The announcement outlines ProLegal’s evolution beyond traditional pre-settlement funding into a suite of integrated services intended to support cases from intake through resolution. Company leadership points to longstanding industry issues such as opaque pricing, misaligned incentives, and overly transactional relationships between funders, attorneys, and clients. ProLegal’s response has been to rethink its operating model with a focus on collaboration, transparency, and practical support that extends beyond capital alone.

Under the new structure, ProLegal now offers a range of complementary services. These include ProLegal AI, which provides attorneys with artificial intelligence tools for document preparation and case support, and ProLegal Live, a virtual staffing solution designed to assist law firms with intake, onboarding, and administrative workflows.

The company has also launched ProLegal Rides, a transportation coordination service aimed at helping plaintiffs attend medical appointments that are critical to both recovery and case valuation. Additional offerings include a law firm design studio, a healthcare provider network focused on ethical referrals, and a centralized funding dashboard that allows for real-time case visibility.

Central to the rebrand is what ProLegal describes as an “Integrity Trifecta,” an internal framework requiring that funding advances meet standards of necessity, merit, and alignment with litigation strategy. The company emphasizes deeper engagement with attorneys, positioning them as strategic partners rather than intermediaries.

Case Developments Commercial

Litigation Funder Sues Client for $1M Settlement Proceeds

By John Freund |

A Croton-on-Hudson-based litigation financier has filed suit against a former client following a roughly $1 million settlement, alleging the funded party failed to honor the repayment terms of their litigation funding agreement. The dispute highlights the contractual and enforcement challenges that can arise once a funded matter reaches resolution.

According to Westfair Online, the financier provided capital to support a plaintiff’s legal claim in exchange for a defined share of any recovery. After the underlying litigation concluded with a significant settlement, the funder alleges that the plaintiff refused to authorize payment of the agreed-upon amount. The lawsuit claims breach of contract and seeks to recover the funder’s share of the settlement proceeds, along with any additional relief available under the agreement.

The case underscores a recurring tension within the litigation funding ecosystem. While funders assume substantial risk by advancing capital on a non-recourse basis, they remain dependent on clear contractual rights and post-settlement cooperation from funded parties. When those relationships break down, enforcement actions against clients, though relatively uncommon, become a necessary tool to protect funders’ investments.

For industry participants, the lawsuit serves as a reminder that even straightforward single-case funding arrangements can result in contentious disputes after a successful outcome. It also illustrates why funders increasingly emphasize robust contractual language, transparency around settlement mechanics, and direct involvement in distribution processes to reduce the risk of non-payment.