When the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California became the first federal court in the nation to set down transparency requirements for litigation funding, it focused on a particular segment of the industry: class actions. The major funders such as Burford Capital and Bentham IMF reacted with a shrug, saying that class actions are a small or nonexistent part of their business.
It invites the question: why have some litigation financiers steered clear of what plaintiffs lawyers have long recognized is a lucrative area of the legal profession? The answer involves a bedrock rule of American legal ethics, and points to the careful and sometimes divergent ways that litigation funders keep on the right side of its mandate that attorneys not share fees with nonlawyers.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
