Tracking Techies: Finding the Footprints of America’s Switched-on Lawyers

While the moniker “America’s Techiest Lawyer” may conjure an entity with a quad-core heart, onboard latte maker and a predilection to show up for court in holographic form, it turns out law’s real-life silicon wonders are a bit tamer than that.

But not by much.

During the past few weeks, the ABA Journal has been on cybersafari for the dukes and duchesses of the digital realm. And while we have no trophy lashed to the hood of our Jeep yet, we do have a much better idea of who we’re looking for—thanks to some expert hunting tips from gifted guides who, on another day, would be considered fair game.

Interviews with some well-known names in technology-enhanced law practice led us to a list—a sort of trait-based picture—of what would make an attorney one of the techiest lawyers (Photo Gallery) around.

Next time you find yourself with silicon stardust on your sleeve and you spin around to grab a look at law’s next big thing, chances are you’ll find your wunderkind possesses all, or at least most, of certain telltale markings.

While America’s techiest are polite enough not to froth at the mouth, they’re nevertheless afflicted with an insatiable technolust. Like kids scrambling to the jingle of the ice cream truck, they just can’t help themselves. Some might even call them rabid.

Full Story

Share

Do You Want to Borrow Money From a Lawsuit?

Michael Jefferson asked:




If you have a pending personal injury case and are looking to borrow money from a lawsuit, before it has settled, there are a few simple steps that you need to take. The approval process can be fast and efficient, provided all of the documentation is supplied quickly to the lawsuit loan company.

How do you go about borrowing money from a lawsuit?

Find a lawsuit funding company
You can find these companies by either doing a search online, getting a recommendation or asking your attorney if they know of any reputable companies

Make sure that your particular case qualifies
Not all cases are eligible for lawsuit funding. In particular bankruptcy and divorce cases do not quality. In some instances workers compensation cases are also ineligible, but it is best to check with the particular lender on this issue.

The most common types of cases where you can borrow money from a lawsuit are:

car accidents pedestrian accidents constructions falls slip and fall cases asbestos cases motor bike accidents class action lawsuits wrongful death

There are may others that would also be eligible, so it is best to speak directly with your chosen funding company to see whether your case qualifies.

Check the rates that are being offered
Different companies offer different rates, so do some research before getting into anything. Ask around and also ask them for a detailed breakdown on what you will owe a the end of the case

Make an application
Once you are done with the research and have decided on the company that you will borrow the money from, it is time to make an application. Often this can even done online with a short contact form, or you can phone the lender directly

Tell your attorney
The next crucial step is to tell your attorney that are you are going to borrow money from a lawsuit. They need to be made aware because the lawsuit funding company will be contacting them and requesting supporting documents and information that is critical in getting your application approved quickly.

Mention any other outstanding loans that you have
You also need to let the lending company know if you have any other outstanding lawsuit loans with other companies. This will be taken into account during the approval process and in many instances the company can take over your previous loan.

The best part of borrowing money from a lawsuit is that there are no credit or income checks, the process is extremely fast and there are no monthly repayments to be made. These types of lawsuit loans are also non recourse, so if you don’t win there is nothing to repay.



Share

Lawsuit Anatomy



Anatomy of a Lawsuit

Learning the anatomy of civil lawsuits is as easy as spelling “CAT”.

Complaint – Answer – Trial

It’s as simple as that!

Master this simple truth and you will soon be operating successfully in court.

Plaintiffs file complaints.

Defendants file answers.

Judges examine the facts and law at trial to decide who wins.

It’s not difficult if you keep these three steps in mind.

Every lawsuit has this same fundamental anatomy.

Complaint. Answer. Trial.

If you can spell “CAT”, you can master the basics.

C = Complaint … Where the case begins, when the plaintiff complains.

A = Answer … Where the defendant responds to the plaintiff’s complaint.

T = Trial … Where the judge (or jury) decides the final verdict.

After the plaintiff files his complaint, the defendant may file a flurry of motions that seek to have the complaint stricken or dismissed so he need not answer.

If the flurry of motions fails, the defendant must answer the complaint.

Once the defendant is compelled to answer the complaint (and sometimes before) both parties are permitted to engage in discovery of evidence procedures, i.e., to demand production of documents and things, to require the other side to admit facts and law under oath, to ask relevant questions of anyone, to put evidence on the public record, and to attempt to settle the case and avoid the expense, delay, and uncertainty of going to trial.

If the parties cannot settle their dispute during the discovery phase, the court must examine the evidence, hear testimony, consider arguments of law, and render its final judgment.

It’s just that simple.

By knowing this, you can write a powerful complaint or avoid filing an answer by moving the court to dismiss or strike the complaint or require a confusing or poorly worded complaint to be re-written. You can get the evidence you need with effective discovery tools, getting facts into evidence,demanding your rights, and forcing the court to do what’s right … according to law.

The anatomy of a lawsuit is no more complicated than this. CAT. By knowing the basics you strengthen your case.

Resolve conflicts peaceably, according to the rules that control both judges and lawyers in our courts.



By:

About the Author:
Attorney Frederick Graves created Jurisdictionary (www.jurisdictionary.com) in 1997 to provide self-help for those who either cannot afford a lawyer or aren’t sure they can trust the lawyer they have. Learn more at http://www.jurisdictionary.com

lawbook@jurisdictionary.com



Share

Lawsuit Funding – Examining Lien Priority

Paul Coppola asked:




A lawsuit funding transaction is the selling of part of the future proceeds expected from a pending litigation.  The plaintiff  in the lawsuit effectively transfers by contract a portion of the case once it is successful.  Part of the transaction is the agreement that the contract will be placed in the file as a “lien” against the future settlement.  In other words, the property must be repaid, with costs, to the rightful owner BEFORE the plaintiff receives any of the settlement.

A lawsuit loan is only one potential lien which may exist in any given file.  Below we discuss some common examples of liens contained in litigation files.

1.  Attorney’s Fee – In cases where the attorney’s fee is only paid if the case is successful (otherwise known as contingency fees), the attorney’s fee is essentially a lien on the proceeds of the case.  These terms are sometimes negotiated and memorialized in a retainer agreement signed by the attorney and the client.  And are most commonly seen in personal injury cases.  The fee usually ranges from 33% to 40% of the total recovery.  Of importance for purposes of lawsuit funding is that the attorney’s fee is superior to all other liens in the file.

2.  Letters of Protection – Similar to the above, letters of protection are usually found in personal injury actions where there is extensive medical treatment.  Basically, a letter of protection is a written acknowledgment, by an attorney, that his office will “protect” the medical provider’s lien for medical treatment rendered.  It is unclear whether these acknowledgments take priority over lawsuit funding transactions, but nonetheless, pre-settlement funding companies pay special attention to outstanding medical bills when underwriting a case.  Sometimes the amount of the LOP is negotiated at the time of settlement, particularly if the attorney and medical provider routinely represent/treat the same individuals.

3.  Federal Tax Liens – By law, the presence of Federal Tax Liens take priority over other liens in the file.  And this should come to no surprise to anyone since Uncle Sam wants his money first.  These liens will typically attach to the proceeds and may have to be directly deposited with the IRS or other Federal Agency as full or partial payment of these obligations.  In some instances, these amount can be negotiated down in an effort to settle a case.

4.  Child Support – Most state laws require the presence of child support liens be superior to lawsuit loans.  The public policy argument is obviously to protect the welfare of children.  Yet the presence of these and all other liens sometimes hinder settlement negotiations as the plaintiff suddenly realizes that he is pursuing his case to pay off his creditors.  Under these circumstances, what is the plaintiff’s incentive to settle?

The litigation cash advance business is only really concerned with liens which take priority over the lawsuit loan as a matter of law.  This is truly jurisdiction specific but the liens mentioned above are commonly seen in the day to day business dealings of lawsuit funding companies.

Thank you for your interest in the pre settlement loan business.

pmc



Share

Lawsuit Settlements For Statin Drug Deaths

Kathryn Picoulin asked:




Baycol, a statin drug also known as cerivastatin, was pulled off the market in 2001 due to causing more than 100 deaths, mainly from complications of severe muscle breakdown known as rhabdomyolysis. So far, Bayer, the pharmaceutical company responsible for producing Baycol, has paid out $750 million in settlements with 10,378 more cases to settle, and was fined for withholding information from Germany’s federal drug agencies on Baycol’s potentially fatal effects when interacting with certain other drugs.

Lawsuits have also been filed against Pfizer Pharmaceutical to recover damages by patients who were prescribed Lipitor. This statin drug has been linked to a series of serious side effects including liver damage and kidney failure.

Lipitor, Zocor and Mevacor have been linked to rhabdomyolysis. The FDA has ordered “black box warning labels” to be place on packaging, but has not recalled the drugs as yet. Pravachol has been linked to dozens of deaths from rhabdomyolysis.

Rhabdomyolysis develops when massive amounts of muscle protein and toxic cell components from dying muscle fibers are released into the blood stream to be filtered out by the kidneys. These muscle by-products saturate the kidneys and overwhelm the filtration process blocking and damaging the structures and tubules of the kidneys. This acute tubular necrosis leads to kidney failure. It is reported to affect 6 in every 10,000 individuals taking a statin drug.

Initial symptoms of rhabdomyolysis are muscle tenderness and weakness in the legs (especially the calves), fatigue, nausea, vomiting, and dark urine. The type of muscle discomfort can range from muscle tenderness to cramping to actual pain. These symptoms can occur even at rest and will increase with exercise. Symptoms can continue for months after discontinuing the statin drug. Monitoring blood levels may not pick up ensuing rhabdomyolysis.

Although the pharmaceutical companies insist that only 2-3 % of the patient taking statin drugs have side effects, a series of studies being conducted in Southern California by Dr. Golomb show that 98% of the patients on Lipitor and 33% of the patients on Mevacor suffer from muscle symptoms.

A study completed in 2008 reported that new muscle cell growth was reduced by 50% in those using simvastatin at 40 mg/day.



Share

Foreclosure Lawsuit – What the Bank Must Prove



This article will be the start of an ongoing series that will examine various general aspects of the legal environment of foreclosure. Homeowners far too often avoid going to the initial court hearing to discuss the mortgage default, and the bank has a very easy time of proceeding from missed payments to sheriff sale to eviction. There are a number of methods and ideas that can be used during the court procedures, though, to give these families more time, more options, or a second chance to stop foreclosure and get their loans back on track. But without a broad understanding of what the court process is designed to accomplish, these opportunities may be lost before homeowners know they have them.

Every legal claim made by the lender has numerous elements that need to be proven and backed up with facts. Obviously, in a foreclosure lawsuit, the main claim will be that a contract was breached, namely the mortgage loan secured by the house. The lender will attempt to prove that the homeowners did not pay as agreed and ask the court to grant them a judgment, which will allow them to sell the house at a county sheriff sale, in order to pay off this judgment. In most foreclosure cases, this seems like it would be a pretty open and shut case, especially if the family knows it has not made a payment in several months. This may be one reason that they do not often make it to the foreclosure court hearing — they know they have little defense and believe it will do no good to argue that a financial hardship has caused them to fall behind.

It is important, though, that homeowners understand how these processes work and what the lender has to show in order to have a legitimate case. The first element that the foreclosing bank has to prove is that there was a legally binding contract between the lender and the homeowners. After a loan has been sold numerous times, it may seem quite confusing to the average homeowner of who actually owns the mortgage. In fact, with the amount of technical, incomprehensible adjustable rate mortgages and interest-only loans and subprime mortgages that were packaged and sold off to hedge funds, financial institutions, and investors, there may be some very tough questions that the lender would have to answer if challenged on this element. A court in Ohio recently dismissed fourteen foreclosure cases because the lender could not prove they owned the loans, so this is not as easy as it would seem.

The second aspect that mortgage companies have to prove when suing for foreclosure is that the lender performed as agreed under the contract. Wading through dozens of pages of mortgage contracts is not the most inviting exercise for the average homeowner, but understanding exactly what the lender’s obligations are during the term of the mortgage may help them prepare a better answer to the foreclosure lawsuit. In particular, the lender is usually responsible for collecting and applying payments in a reasonable manner, a practice some lenders have been caught not following.

In fact, we receive stories from homeowners every day that state their lender did not apply a payment, applied payments incorrectly, or lost payments completely, which led them to initiating a foreclosure unjustifiably. There are also literally hundreds of stories from homeowners who have had their loans serviced in a fraudulent manner. Simply assuming the bank has performed its duty under the contract relieves them of the burden of proof. Homeowners can ask for real proof that the bank actually did fulfill its own obligations under the terms of the agreement, a request that the bank may have trouble complying with.

The lender must also show that the homeowners have breached the contract, thereby satisfying the proof required of the third element. This is usually easier to show, because they can bring in payment records with clear gaps in payments. However, homeowners who have had payments misapplied or cashed but not applied at all can state these defenses, and the lender must prove that they did not actually receive payment. If the foreclosure victims can show they have not breached the contract, there is usually no case against them. In fact, they may have claims against the lender who was negligent about collecting payments and began a potentially fraudulent foreclosure lawsuit against the clients.

But even in cases where the payments were simply never sent in due to a financial hardship, homeowners can often utilize other resources of the court to resolve the problem. Often, judges would rather keep the case from going to trial if a settlement can be reached. This may involve the two parties coming up with a mutually agreed-upon repayment plan, temporary loan modification, or other similar program which gives the homeowners another chance to get back on track with the mortgage and repair their credit.

The final element of a foreclosure case that the lender must prove is that they have suffered actual damages due to the homeowners’ breach of the contract. Obviously, they are not collecting interest or principal payments, which does hurt the lending business and decreases their ongoing revenue. Also, they have to expend more resources in attempting to collect the missed payments, reviewing loan documents, examining the benefits of foreclosing on the property, paying costs of foreclosure, and so on. It is clear that banks suffer some damages of the loan during a foreclosure, even if it is only a very small part of the company’s overall business.

The burden of proof falls upon the bank to prove each and every single one of these elements of their case against the homeowners. When foreclosure victims avoid these hearings, though, and judge themselves as guilty without requiring the lender to show proof, they make the foreclosure process much easier for the lenders. Hopefully, by being aware of the general aspects of a foreclosure (and any other breach of contract) case, the homeowners will be able to mount a more substantial defense and show these mortgage companies that they will not simply be pushed around, intimidated, and forced out of the home due to irrational fears and anxieties over the situation.

DISCLAIMER: None of the general information or advice offered in this article should be taken as legal advice, which can only be dispensed by a state-licensed attorney, who has completed an approved course of study at an accredited law school and has passed the mandated examination to become a state-approved attorney. Homeowners in foreclosure who desire representation should seek out a licensed attorney who is able to work in their state. This article is designed to provide general information only and act as a starting point to other independent research. Laws vary by state and court rules vary by county and specific court, which a licensed attorney can explain far better than any single article on the subject.



By: Nick Adama

About the Author:
ForeclosureFish.com is a website that provides homeowners in danger of losing their properties with the resources and advice they need to avoid foreclosure completely. Visit the website today to search through articles, blog entries, and reference materials, and to download a free e-book explaining the basics of foreclosure and what methods are commonly used to stop the process: http://www.foreclosurefish.com/



Share

Pending Lawsuit Loans



In the United States there are thousands of lawsuits filed each week. These lawsuits stem from personal injury to commercial litigation cases. When a person is unable to settle their case through negotiations with the defense, the plaintiff will file a lawsuit against the other party.

A lawsuit is a legal action brought upon by a plaintiff against the defense. The plaintiff may file a suit in hopes to collect damages from an incident that caused physical and/or financial harm. These incidents may be a result of a car accident, slip and fall, wrongful death, patent infringement and breach of contract.

There are two sides to every lawsuit. The plaintiff is the person or entity filing the action, and the defense is the party that the action is being filed against. When the plaintiff files a lawsuit the defense will have a certain amount of time to answer. If the defense does not answer within a specific time frame, they will automatically lose the case.

A lawsuit can take a lot of time before the case goes to trial. This can force some people into making decisions that they would otherwise not make if their finances were in order. It is estimated that over 90% of all injury claims and lawsuits filed each year are settled before the case reaches court. Many of these settlements are agreed upon because the plaintiff can’t wait the course of a suit; they just don’t have the money to wait.

When a person files a lawsuit instead of settling for less, they may borrow against their suit. A pending lawsuit loan is an advance against a case that hasn’t yet settled. In legal terms, the word pending means an ongoing action that has not been resolved. A lawsuit loan is a non recourse instrument provided by a company that invests in pending lawsuits.

A pending lawsuit loan is different than a settlement loan. A pending loan is provided before a case has matured, while a settlement loan is against those cases that have already settled or the plaintiff won a judgment during a trial.

There are hundreds of people each day that apply for cash advances against pending actions. These people can borrow money before a case has settled; however there are no guarantee the case will be approved. The review process for any applicant usually starts with a conversation between the underwriter and attorney. Information is requested through a case document release form. When a company receives the information they will underwrite the case and determine if the client should be approved or denied. This information is critical because it’s used to determine liability and negligence. If during the underwriting process the case can be funded, an offer will be made to the applicant.

Pending lawsuit loans are more expensive than settlement loans because the cases have not yet settled. Lawsuit loans are non recourse which means if you lose your case you don’t have to pay back the advance. When a lender provides an advance against a settled case the rates are typically lower because the likelihood of receiving compensation increases; which in-turn minimizes the risk for the investor.

It is important to understand that a lawsuit loan is expensive. You should only consider borrowing against your case if you have no other financial options.



By: Josh Shores

About the Author:
Josh Shores is a Director with LawLeaf, a lawsuit funding company.



Share

UAV Hits Tour de France Rider – Drones Footage Helps With Lawsuit



It is of course is 2020 and this year’s Tour de France s still recovering from the horrific accidents experienced in 2018 when a K2ITI company UAV crashed into a rider in a tunnel causing a chain reaction. Although the publicity from the event is helping this year’s two or to France due to the ongoing court case, there have been many calls for more safety in the event. Including looking back at the crashes in 2011 caused by team cars crashing into cyclists, and the big crash in 2015 with those new ultra-light graphene coated carbon nano-tube bikes, which when they come apart cut through skin like razor blades.

Yes, all those problems have been fixed, but in 2018 in an attempt to get rid of all the cars and motorcycles on the course, the Tour de France allowed all the teams to have UAVs to deliver water bottles, food, and TV coverage – thus, limiting the number of autonomous cars on the course to only those with anti-collision supercomputer algorithms, and not more than one human mechanic. All communication now would be done by UAV relay and radio. The riders are quite pleased, and the UAVs, which are actually called “micro-air vehicles” or MAVs seemed to do the trick.

In a recap of what had happened in the 2018 race, although no one knew it at the time, an MAV followed the riders through the tunnel. “The 2018 Tour de France went through the tunnel for the 19th stage from Modane Valfrejus to L’Alpe d’Huez,” well at least it did for the first break away groups, but when the Pelaton went through, everyone was stunned, as only one rider came out the other side, and then the second to come out 2 minutes later was so bloody he couldn’t see and pulled over and collapsed, no one else came out, what on Earth happened.

Well, the rest is history now, but in that massive crash one rider died, one is now a paraplegic, and 27-riders were taken out of the race and three teams were forced to quit as they didn’t have quorum or rather enough riders to continue, as per the racing rules. It was the worst crash ever in Tour de France history.

Some are blaming K2ITI or “Kansas Kinetic Invisible Technologies Inc.” from the Kanza Business & Technology Park in Topeka Kansas, which is also the recipient of a high-speed data system funded by Apple and Google. K2ITI you might have read is also known for its latest DARPA inspired robotic battlespace Cheetah, a project done with MIT and Carnegie Mellon Robotics called “Kiti” which when shot at the robotic Cheetah turns invisible and zig zags so it cannot be hit while it advances on its human army targets, now they have a swarming netcentric version and armies around the world fight in fear of this new ominous weapon system.

At the court hearing there was an unusual expert witness, a car washing entrepreneur, and no one could figure out why the families suing the race would call him to testify. One commentary newscaster on Versus said, “what on Earth are the attorneys thinking here, who is this guy, he washes cars?” Then the guest reviewing the case stated; “this guy apparently has ridden his bicycle across the US, runs and think tank, is a pilot, and knows a little bit about robotics from the car wash business, as that industry uses automated tunnels with sensors to clean cars.” The Versus commentator then shut up and said “Oh, then the Tour de France folks must be worried,” the guest just smiled and said; “Indeed.”

The lead scientist for K2ITI was certain that the engineering in their MAV is sufficient to fly through any tunnel, or around or through any obstacle, even noting that they had tested the darn thing in a wind tunnel to begin with, where they got all their calibrations for their optical flow sensors, and it didn’t matter that the MAV was flying through a dark tunnel because it used sonar, lidar, and infrared, it didn’t need to see in the human sense of what we consider visual optics.

Further, the Tour de France committee was convinced because the tunnel was dark, that even though the video footage from the UAV was collected and subpoenaed for the courtroom, that there wouldn’t be anything on it to see any way to prove that the UAV caused the crash. Crashes happen all the time in the Tour de France, and when the light changes, sometimes the eyes of the riders do not adapt fast enough, and it only takes one mistake from one of the rides in the lead to cause the whole Pelaton to crash. That’s what happened as far as they were concerned. That was their story, and they were sticking to it, and denying any claims in the lawsuit. It wasn’t their fault, even though they had allowed UAVs on the course.

The company flying a UAV which contracted with Versus TV flew through that tunnel twice previously with the two break away groups without any problem. One of the telerobotic pilots, who allowed the UAV to fly autonomously through the tunnel was a little nervous, he admitted to the jury and court, at least the first time it flew through, but when it came out the other side with the riders, he figured it wasn’t a problem, and then when the MAV did it again, they figured they were home free – it’s safe.

In looking at the footage, which was somewhat obscured it appears that the Venturi effect with all the riders in the tunnel caused a little bit of buffeting, and one of the winglets on one of the wingtips hit the overhead sprinkler system in the tunnel – which caused the UAV to tumble and actually fly right across in front of all the lead writers at an angle, taking out all but one rider. As all the other riders crashed, it was a giant pile up, as is usually the case in the big crashes, with all the broken bones and bloodshed, no one came out the other side, except for the one rider who must have a personal angel. And since there weren’t any cars allowed on the course, there was no one to help anybody.

It turns out there was just enough evidence from the video to see what had happened because the UAV caused quite a bit of sparking when it hit the overhead sprinkler system lighting up the tunnel, and as each rider crashed, more sparks could be seen which was enough to illuminate the video footage. Plus, the UAV just happened to land and crash up-side-down against the side of the tunnel with the video facing backwards, which very much helped the forensic investigation of exactly what happened. Meanwhile, all of the testimonial from the riders filled in the rest of the blanks.

The expert witness explained how optical sensors can go astray, break, and how the Venturi effect works inside the tunnel. That tunnel is also known for increased wind speeds during stormy weather, and the winds were quite high that day. He explained that flying through that tunnel in those conditions was not a wise choice even for that advanced technology.

The jury agreed, and the Tour de France must pay. Nevertheless, the race this year will have increased viewership due to all this external an unfortunate publicity surrounding the event, and they have more than made up the money from big corporate advertisers. At least the fallen riders now will have their medical bills paid, the race will go on, and the families will be fairly compensated.



By: Lance Winslow

About the Author:
Lance Winslow has launched a new provocative series of eBooks – of Fictional Short Stories. Lance Winslow is a retired Founder of a Nationwide Franchise Chain, and now runs the Online Think Tank; http://www.worldthinktank.net



Share

Five Things Lawyers Should Know About Lawsuit Funding



Recently, I was asked what benefits a lawsuit funding company can offer attorneys who represent clients in need of pre settlement loans. That is, clients who have an immediate need for cash but who have already exhausted or otherwise do not have other avenues of cash currently available to them.

Lawsuit funding companies sometimes meet resistance from law firms when their clients apply for a cash advance. The reasons are many but usually revolve around a negative stigma attached to the litigation finance industry with regard to price AND the idea that counseling clients with regard to financial transactions is usually outside the scope of representation originally agreed upon by the attorney and client.

Below I address the top 5 things attorneys should know about the lawsuit cash advance business in an effort to address some of these concerns.

1. Not All Lawsuit Loan Terms are Oppressive.

I have touched on this in earlier posts, but the lawsuit funding industry has evolved since its inception almost 15 years ago. Not only have origination and processing systems become more efficient, but there is also much more competition in the marketplace. Thus, lawsuit advance outfits are forced to take a more competitive approach to pricing. In fact, case loans are routinely offered at lower pricing structures than at any other time previously. All of this has occurred in an economic climate where available risk capital is scarce and inflation rampant.

Today, it is not uncommon for lawsuit advances to be offered for up to 12% of the case’s value. And for less than it costs for an advance on a credit card. Of course, there are some lawsuit funding companies who have different portfolio objectives and must charge more expensive “rates” and fees to meet their objectives.

2. Rate is of Paramount Importance when Settling the Case.

Lawsuit funding operations are well aware of the need to settle cases. Attorneys who work on a contingency fee basis, such as personal injury lawyers, understand the best interests of all parties are served if the case settles before trial. Most plaintiff attorneys would agree even if a favorable verdict is reached, they still have to spend considerable time and money pursuing justice in the appellate courts. Lawsuit funding professionals, many who are attorneys themselves, are intimately aware of this fact.

Therefore, lawsuit cash advance liens rarely inhibit settlement. In fact, many steps are taken to ensure this unfortunate circumstance remains the exception rather than the rule. One such example is the limiting of the “lawsuit loan” to 10% of the estimated value of the case. With today’s rates and fees, an advance would normally fail to reach a level where the plaintiff and his attorney would be unable to settle the matter because of the lien.

Further, funding companies are usually flexible for purposes of settlement. If an unforeseen issue arises which would negatively impact the ability to recover damages, funding outfits – like most investors who want to ensure the safety of their risk capital first – would be likely to compromise the requirements of their contract in an effort close the file and move on.

3. Lawsuit Funding Applicants Need Attorney Cooperation.

The whole process of offering money against the future proceeds of a legal proceeding depends on the participation and cooperation of plaintiff’s counsel. From the moment an applicant requests funds, the attorney’s participation is required. First, his office must forward the relevant documents supporting the claim. Next, a conversation between the funding company and the attorney must occur prior to approval. Once approved, attorneys must then acknowledge the lawsuit funding agreement and recognize it as a valid lien on the file. The transaction is finalized and matter concluded when the attorney forwards a check from his trust account directly to the funding company.

I am unaware of any funding operation which will advance money against a lawsuit without the attorney participating in the transaction, at least on a limited basis. Without attorney participation, the funding process simply cannot happen.

4. Clients Need Speed.

The majority of lawsuit funding clients need money immediately. It is doubtful any attorney who practices personal injury law has not had a client request an advance on his case. Of course, many state ethical rules prohibit this type of assistance. Yet that hardly helps plaintiffs who are behind on their bills or otherwise have financial difficulty.

What attorneys should realize is the process can and will move smoothly if the documents requested are forwarded in a timely manner. Most lawsuit loans are approved with less than 30 pages of documentation being analyzed. These papers can be faxed or emailed with minimal amount of time spent on the part of the lawyer or his support staff. This makes the approval process move quickly so the pre-settlement funding company can do its job and the client can get much needed relief as soon as possible.

Similarly, approvals for many lawsuit loans, especially the larger deals, depend heavily on a successful conversation with the attorney about the merits of the case and other relevant issues. Realizing an attorney’s time is limited and valuable, lawsuit funding underwriters do whatever is necessary to keep the conversation focused on only the most material considerations.

Keeping it “short and sweet” helps funders, attorneys, and clients alike by keeping the process moving along. The sooner the case can be underwritten, the sooner the client can get the help he needs. The attorney gains the reward of a grateful client and another task deleted from his list.

5. Lawsuit Funding is a Business.

Attorneys who have clients wishing to obtain money from litigation finance professionals should keep in mind the business of offering legal loans is exactly that – a business. Like any other business, there are origination costs in the form of advertising or other marketing efforts, cost of inventory (money), and administrative expenses just to name a few. Further, it is the goal of any service based business to provide the service and turn a profit.

I mention this because many attorneys feel the need to negotiate the terms of a lawsuit funding transaction AFTER the case settles. Understandably, plaintiff’s counsel will try to negotiate all liens if it increases the chance to settle a case. However, some attorneys want to negotiate the payment terms after a settlement is in place simply because they feel they can.

However, the appropriate time to negotiate is before an agreement is executed, not after. Further, offering the lawsuit funding company its money back, for example, is not operating in good faith. It is simply good business to allow a business to turn a profit. As we all know, a win – win scenario is the goal. If any business is not allowed to make money, it will soon be out of business. Lawsuit funding is no different.

Fortunately, the pre settlement finance business is becoming more efficient every day and offers clients the ability to weather the financial storm while the case is being litigated. In other words, lawsuit funding is part of the personal injury game. A game that keeps reinventing itself from year to year. Though many changes arise, the main goal remains the same – to help clients achieve justice.

Thank you for your interest in the lawsuit funding business.



By: Paul Coppola

About the Author:
Paul M. Coppola, Esq.

http://fairratefunding.com



Share

Should I Participate In a Class Action Lawsuit?



You might have read recently about the ‘class action lawsuit’ being brought against a major telecommunications company in Australia. It is claimed that nearly 18,000 of that company’s customers (and also some dealers) have joined the lawsuit, which arises from allegations of poor network performance.

One of the problems facing an aggrieved customer, is the economics of bringing legal action. Also, the financial loss arising from a slow or unreliable network is often difficult to quantify in dollar terms. If the impact is too serious, affected customers may vote with their feet, but changing networks is usually inconvenient, and terminating the original service may involve a penalty cost… not enough to justify the legal fees to take the matter to court, but certainly enough to make disgruntled customers see red. Although modern consumer legislation encourages large utility companies to meet minimum standards of customer service, the practical reality is that individual consumers remain relatively powerless.

This is where the right to bring a class action serves a valuable role, by allowing the claims of many affected customers to be consolidated into one lawsuit, reducing the legal costs payable by each individual class member, and also avoiding the impact of many similar claims clogging up the court system. This concept of group litigation is not a modern development, and in fact was very common in the 13th and 14th centuries in medieval England.

However, to participate in a class action, each participating member must contribute financially, or enter into a litigation funding agreement. Although the end result may exceed financial contributions, that is not guaranteed. If the lawsuit is unsuccessful, the contributions will be lost and there is a risk of members having to contribute additional sums towards any adverse costs order – that is, where the class action fails, and the plaintiff (the person representing the class members) is ordered to meet some of the defendant’s legal costs.

Once a class member has signed up to participate in a class action, they may have very little say in the decisions made on their behalf. Although class members can decide not to accept the class settlement, that option is, for many people, a Hobson’s choice… the member who opts out will then need to pursue his or her claim independently.

Another recent class action lawsuit, commenced in July 2009, was brought against one of Australia’s largest banks on behalf of individual investors who lost money after a financial broking company collapsed. Those investors allege the bank was partially or wholly responsible for their losses. An earlier, threatened action, also against the same bank but involving a different representative, led to a settlement for about 2,000 investors, but other investors are continuing their group action against the bank.

Further class actions, also arising from the broking company’s collapse, have been commenced against a bank in Queensland, Australia, and against the manager of two franchise stores associated with that bank.

These lawsuits illustrate the advantages and disadvantages of class action proceedings. In many cases, the sheer weight of numbers encourages a negotiated settlement, as the defendants in these cases are also anxious to avoid unrecoverable legal costs and the damage to their reputations from prolonged publicity. Although negotiated outcomes may be much less than the sums claimed, for many members the settlement will represent an outcome that could not otherwise be afforded. Also, as is the case with court proceedings generally, lengthy delays are nearly inevitable unless an early settlement is reached.

In the first case, involving the telecommunications company, it is alleged by some customers that call reception issues led to the loss of work opportunities, while affected business customers say they have suffered reduced trading as a consequence of poor network performance. More recently, the same company has been embroiled in a new situation where it is alleged that personal information of up to 4 million customers was able to be improperly accessed by individuals outside the company. Customers affected by this privacy breach may be able to join in a separate class action against the company, or all of the claims may be combined in one action.

Either way, the company’s woes appear likely to be front page news for some time yet.

If you are asked to join a class action, consider obtaining legal advice about alternative options to address your specific loss or problem, and to receive independent advice about the merits of the proposed class action lawsuit.

Note: This article is primarily about class actions in Australia. The general principles may be relevant to some other jurisdictions, but there will be significant differences in the applicable rules and procedures.



By: Stephen G Bourne

About the Author:
Stephen Bourne is a lawyer in Australia (see profile ), and also contributes articles and case summaries to the Ekupu Law Library website. Stephen has law and business qualifications, and is a Fellow of the Australian and New Zealand Institute of Insurance and Finance.



Share