Trending Now
Commercial Deals

Renovus Capital Partners Announces Majority Investment in Angeion Group

By Harry Moran |
October 8, 2024

Renovus Capital Partners Announces Majority Investment in Angeion Group

Renovus Capital Partners (“Renovus”), a private equity firm based in the Philadelphia area, announced today that it has acquired a majority stake in class action case management solutions provider Angeion Group, LLC (“Angeion”). Founder & Chief Executive Officer, Steven Weisbrot, and senior members of the management team have maintained a significant ownership stake in the Company and will continue to drive the growth of the platform in partnership with Renovus. Marks Baughan Securities LLC served as the exclusive financial advisor to Angeion Group in the transaction.

Angeion, which is also headquartered in Philadelphia, is the leading innovator in the class action settlement industry. As a global provider of notice and claims administration services, the company has built a technology platform that enables its legal experts to manage the largest and most complex class action settlements.

The Renovus partnership will enable Angeion to accelerate the buildout of its management, client service, and delivery teams and increase investment in its proprietary class action technology solutions. Angeion plans to grow its leadership position in the US market and continue to develop its international business through a combination of key hires, new solutions, and strategic acquisitions.

Angeion was founded in 2013 by Steve Weisbrot, Esq. and Christopher Chimicles, with a mission to modernize the class action settlements industry. With over 160 team members, the Company provides high-quality service and innovative technology solutions in settlement administration, adapting to the constantly evolving legal services ecosystem. To date, its team has managed more than 2,000 class action settlements and distributed over $10 billion to class members.

“This partnership marks a major milestone in Angeion’s growth journey,” said Weisbrot. “The investment from Renovus is a testament to the dynamic team that has propelled Angeion into the great company that it is today and that will continue to drive its growth into the future. I am extremely proud of what we have accomplished, and I am even more energized for the years ahead.”

“Angeion is one of the most differentiated and fastest growing players in class action services,” said Renovus Managing Director Lee Minkoff. “Renovus has a track record of identifying unique tech-enabled legal services companies, aligning with management on a growth thesis, and making investments to execute that thesis. This is the exact opportunity we have with Angeion, and we could not be more excited to partner with Steve and the management team.”

Marks Baughan served as exclusive financial advisor to Angeion Group.

About Angeion Group

Angeion Group stands at the forefront of settlement administration and legal noticing services. Leveraging advanced technology, proven best practices, and expert consulting, Angeion specializes in managing class actions and other types of mass litigation. Angeion’s dedication to efficiency, accountability, and excellence instills confidence in counsel and the court alike. 

About Renovus Capital PartnersFounded in 2010, Renovus Capital Partners is a lower middle-market private equity firm specializing in the Knowledge and Talent industries. From its base in the Philadelphia area, Renovus manages over $2 billion of assets across its several sector focused funds. The firm’s current portfolio includes over 30 U.S. based businesses specializing in education and workforce development and services companies in the technology, healthcare and professional services markets. Renovus typically makes control buyout investments in founder owned businesses, leveraging its industry expertise and operator network to make operational improvements, recruit top talent and pursue add-on acquisitions. Visit us at www.renovuscapital.com and follow us on LinkedIn.

About the author

Harry Moran

Harry Moran

Commercial

View All
Commercial

Esquire Financial’s Litigation-Related Loans Climb to $1.22 Billion

Esquire Financial Holdings continues to build its bank around the legal industry, with commercial litigation-related lending now the clear centerpiece of its loan book rather than a sideline. The firm's strategy leans into a niche most banks avoid: financing law firms and litigation-related credit at scale.

According to Esquire Financial Holdings, the company's commercial litigation-related loans increased $386.9 million, or 46.3%, to $1.22 billion as of March 31, 2026. That single segment now accounts for roughly two-thirds of Esquire's $1.82 billion total loan portfolio.

The litigation book grew a net $44 million during the quarter — about 15% on an annualized basis — at a yield of approximately 9%, well above conventional commercial lending. Total assets rose 23.9% to $2.42 billion, and the bank's net interest margin reached 6.04%, reflecting how the litigation-related concentration lifts overall returns.

The figures underscore a deliberate design rather than opportunistic growth: a specialized commercial bank concentrating on law-firm and litigation-related credit, funded in large part by legal-industry deposits. Net income for the quarter was $12.2 million, or $1.40 per diluted share. As litigation finance draws regulatory scrutiny elsewhere, Esquire's model shows how a chartered bank is embedding itself in the sector's plumbing.

Commercial

Ohio Advances Litigation Funding Registration and Foreign-Funding Ban

Ohio is moving to join the growing roster of states regulating third-party litigation funding, advancing a bill that pairs registration and disclosure requirements with an outright prohibition on foreign funders.

As reported by Bloomberg Law, House Bill 105 — passed by the Senate and sent to Governor Mike DeWine — would require both commercial and consumer funders to register with the state and disclose their funding agreements to the attorney general after cases resolve. Sponsors have described the sector as an "opaque," billion-dollar industry operating largely out of view.

The measure would bar funders from influencing how lawsuits are handled or settled, and would prohibit funding agreements with individuals or entities domiciled outside the United States. It draws on the National Conference of Insurance Legislators' "Transparency in Third Party Litigation Financing Model Act," creating a uniform registration and oversight framework under the attorney general.

Unlike North Carolina's first-in-the-nation outright ban enacted last month, Ohio's approach centers on transparency and foreign-influence guardrails rather than blanket prohibition — a model other states weighing regulation are likely to study closely. For the defense bar, mandatory disclosure of funding agreements would offer a clearer view of the financial interests behind a claim, potentially informing settlement posture and trial strategy.

Commercial

Op-Ed Warns Congress’s Litigation Finance Bills Threaten Privacy and Free Speech

A new commentary argues that pending federal legislation to regulate third-party litigation funding could do more constitutional harm than substantive reform, raising First Amendment and privacy concerns for funded parties and their backers.

As reported by Bloomberg Law, legal scholar John Shu points to two efforts on Capitol Hill: a bill from Senator Thom Tillis and Representative Kevin Hern that would impose a 41% tax on litigation finance recoveries, and a separate disclosure bill from Representative Darrell Issa that would require funders and financiers to be publicly identified.

Shu contends that mandatory disclosure would expose confidential backers to "doxxing, harassment, retaliation, or worse," and that the tax-enforcement mechanism would force plaintiffs' lawyers to identify private funders to the IRS. He points to the agency's history of controversy over the "targeting of the Tea Party and other conservative groups" as reason for caution about compelled disclosure to federal authorities.

He grounds the constitutional argument in Supreme Court precedent — including NAACP v. Alabama (1958) and Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta (2021) — decisions that shielded confidential donor and membership lists from compelled disclosure. The piece lands as a notable counterweight to the transparency push gaining momentum in statehouses and Congress, reframing the debate around civil liberties rather than courtroom economics.