July Legal Funding News Roundup

Plaintiff Funding Headlines

‍

Judge won't force Viamedia to share documents on litigation funding, DOJ action vs Comcast

Legal funding is front in center in a battle between Viamedia, a New York-based TV advertising business, and Comcast. On June 30, a Chicago federal judge denied Comcast's motion to compel disclosure of documents that Viamedia may have shared with prospective litigation firms, and said that the documents should remain protected under the "work product doctrine."     

‍

‍

Apple is secretly funding a legal battle against a rival

There has been a year-long battle brewing between Apple and Qualcomm, stemming from Apple's claim that Qualcomm has been both selling chips and then demanding royalties on the iPhones. Recently it surfaced that Apple has been dabbling in defense-side litigation financing as well, funding the four iPhone manufacturer's defense against Qualcomm.     

‍

‍

George Court of Appeals Affirms Litigation Finance is not a Loan

This article examines a particular Georgia Court of Appeals case, Cherokee Funding v. Ruth.   In this case, the Georgia Court of Appeals refused to extend the definition of a loan to litigation funding contracts, instead insisting that the legislature is the proper arena. The judge in this case concluded what many funders have been stating for years-- litigation funding more closely resembles an investment contract than a loan.     

‍

‍

International Headlines

‍

Legal funding, particularly commercial litigation finance, continues to gain acceptance internationally.     

‍

1. Harbour Litigation Funding Whitepaper: Developments in the desert  - The oasis that third party funding offers
2. Updates on Third Party Funding in Singapore and developments in Mediation
3. Singapore passes Bill allowing third party funding in arbitration
4. Hong Kong Permits Third Party Funding of Arbitration

‍

  It's not smooth sailing everywhere, though. Recently the supreme court of Ireland shot down any chance of legal funding, and "confirmed that third-party litigation funding by an entity with no independent interest in the underlying proceedings is prohibited under Irish law."   All of this affects US and Canada in three unique ways:

‍

1. Creates more competition, even domestically as foreign firms emerge and invest in the US, most recently Woodsford Litigation: UK Litigation Funder Eyes Untapped Parts of US Market.
2. Canada's soon-to-be trade agreement with the EU has laid out provisions on litigation financing, which may lead to changes in domestic law: Litigation Funding: CETA's Disclosure Requirements
3. Opens up avenues to other types of diversification. Comparing Litigation Financing in the US Marketplace and Other Jurisdictions

‍

Odds and Ends

‍

Status Update: Is There A New Major Player In Litigation Finance?

The Class Action Chronicle: Summer 2017

Best and worst states for litigation financing: Part 2, and Part 1 for those who missed it 

Following the Funders - July Edition

The Future of Litigation Finance is Analytics

Why AI Will TurboCharge the Litigation Funding market

Litigation Finance And Its Uses In Bankruptcy

The Latest Global Trends in Third-Party Litigation Funding

Interview with Julia Salasky, CEO of CrowdJustice