Trending Now
  • Legal-Bay Flags $8.5M Uber Verdict in Arizona Bellwether

Renovus Capital Partners’ Portfolio Company Angeion Group Acquires Donlin Recano

By Harry Moran |

Renovus Capital Partners’ Portfolio Company Angeion Group Acquires Donlin Recano

Angeion Group, a premier provider of end-to-end group litigation services, today announced the acquisition of Donlin Recano & Co. LLC, a distinguished leader in bankruptcy administration. This strategic acquisition enhances Angeion Group’s comprehensive suite of tech-enabled legal services, reinforcing its position as the market leader in group litigation support.

With a legacy of serving over 200 national clients across diverse industries, Donlin Recano brings decades of expertise in claims management, noticing, and bankruptcy case administration. By integrating its operations, Angeion Group is poised to set a new industry standard—leveraging technology, precision, and innovation to redefine the way complex bankruptcy matters are managed.

“Bringing Donlin Recano into the Angeion Group family allows us to apply our hallmark commitment to accuracy, innovation, and efficiency to an already well-respected leader in the restructuring space,” said Steven Weisbrot, CEO of Angeion Group. “Our vision is clear: we will continue to listen to our clients, anticipate their evolving needs, and deliver transformative solutions that exceed expectations.”

This acquisition marks a significant expansion of Angeion Group’s service offerings, seamlessly integrating Donlin Recano’s proven expertise with Angeion’s award-winning technology and client-first approach. Together, the combined division, Angeion Group Bankruptcy Services, will provide an elevated standard of service to law firms, financial institutions, and corporate clients navigating the complexities of bankruptcy and restructuring.

“We’re excited to see the momentum that Angeion Group is building both through organic and inorganic growth,” said Greg Gladstone, Vice President at Renovus. “Donlin Recano seamlessly complements Angeion Group’s extensive legal services capabilities by adding bankruptcy expertise, unlocking significant opportunities for growth and delivering enhanced value to our clients.”

With this acquisition, Angeion Group continues its trajectory of strategic growth and industry leadership, reaffirming its commitment to delivering best-in-class tech-enabled legal services across the litigation and bankruptcy sectors.

About Angeion Group

Angeion Group is a leading provider of legal notice and settlement administration services, leveraging technology, expertise, and data-driven strategies to deliver best-in-class solutions for complex litigation matters. With a reputation for excellence, innovation, and unwavering client commitment, Angeion Group continues to redefine industry standards.

About the author

Harry Moran

Harry Moran

Commercial

View All

Senate Bill Targets Litigation Funding Transparency With Non-Profit Exemption

By John Freund |

U.S. lawmakers are seeking to impose new transparency requirements on third-party litigation financing in major lawsuits, while carving out protections for nonprofit legal organizations that receive funding to provide free legal services.

An article in Reuters reports that a group of Senate Republicans led by Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley has introduced the Litigation Funding Transparency Act. The bill would require disclosure of third-party financing in class actions and mass tort litigation, a narrower scope than past proposals aimed at all civil cases. Importantly for the legal funding market, the legislation includes an exemption for nonprofit legal groups funded by U.S. donors that provide pro bono representation, protecting those organizations from having to disclose their backers.

Supporters of the measure frame it as a move toward greater openness about who is financing high-stakes litigation, arguing that visibility into funding sources is essential to ensure fairness and guard against undue influence. The bill would also bar third-party funders from influencing litigation strategy, settlement negotiations, or accessing confidential documents. However, critics—including the International Legal Finance Association, an industry body—contend that imposing disclosure rules could chill litigation finance and potentially limit access to justice for plaintiffs who rely on third-party capital to pursue claims. Conservative advocacy groups have also weighed in against the bill, fearing that disclosure mandates could expose donors to political scrutiny despite the nonprofit carveout.

The bill’s introduction builds on a history of legislative efforts by Grassley to regulate litigation funding transparency, though previous versions have stalled in the House amid bipartisan opposition.

For the legal funding industry, this legislation raises crucial questions about regulatory risk and disclosure expectations in the U.S. If enacted, the bill could reshape how funders participate in large-scale litigation and how transparency requirements are balanced against concerns over client privacy, fundraising, and the broader access-to-justice mission.

UK Funder Makes Fresh Pitch After Liquidating Core Fund

By John Freund |

A UK-based litigation funder is seeking to reset its strategy and reassure investors after liquidating one of its key funds, underscoring the mounting pressures facing capital providers in an increasingly competitive and scrutinized funding market.

An article in Bloomberg reports that Katch Investment Group wound down a flagship vehicle and returned capital to investors, following a period of underperformance and portfolio challenges. The move marks a significant inflection point for the firm, which is now presenting a revised investment strategy aimed at regaining investor confidence and stabilizing its platform.

According to the report, the funder’s leadership has framed the liquidation as a proactive step designed to preserve value and recalibrate its approach in light of shifting market dynamics. The litigation finance sector has faced headwinds in recent years, including longer case durations, delayed resolutions, and increased regulatory and judicial scrutiny—particularly in collective proceedings. These factors have complicated return profiles and made capital raising more challenging, especially for publicly listed or institutionally backed funders under pressure to demonstrate consistent performance.

The firm is now pitching a refined model that emphasizes disciplined case selection, portfolio diversification, and closer alignment with investor expectations. The reset comes at a time when several UK-based funders are reassessing their exposure to large, high-risk group actions and exploring alternative structures, including co-investment arrangements and bespoke mandates.

Law Firm in J&J Baby Powder Cases Sues Litigation Funders

By John Freund |

A dispute emerging from the long-running talc litigation against Johnson & Johnson has spilled into a new front, as a plaintiffs’ law firm has filed suit against its own litigation funders in a high-stakes funding battle tied to the baby powder cases.

An article in Reuters reports that the firm, which represents claimants alleging that Johnson & Johnson’s baby powder products caused cancer, has sued multiple litigation funders over the terms and enforcement of its funding agreements. The complaint centers on allegations that the funders are seeking repayment amounts the firm contends are excessive or otherwise improper under the governing contracts. The lawsuit underscores the financial strain and complex capital structures underpinning mass tort litigation, particularly in sprawling, multi-year proceedings like the talc cases.

According to the report, the firm argues that the funders’ demands threaten its financial stability and ability to continue representing clients in the ongoing litigation. The case reflects the high-risk, high-reward nature of funding large portfolios of mass tort claims, where returns can hinge on bankruptcy proceedings, global settlements, or appellate outcomes. Johnson & Johnson’s use of bankruptcy maneuvers to resolve talc liabilities has already added further uncertainty and delay, complicating recovery timelines for plaintiffs’ firms and their capital providers.

The dispute highlights the intricate dynamics between law firms and funders in contingency-heavy practices. Funding arrangements in mass torts often involve layered investments, staged drawdowns, and complex priority waterfalls. When case timelines stretch or resolution values shift, tensions over repayment multiples and control rights can quickly surface.