Third Party Marketers Hedge Funds

Third Party Marketers Hedge Funds

Third Party Marketers Hedge Funds

The debate for or against legal funding depends on what side of the issue you’re one. Legal funding allows plaintiffs involved in pending litigation to receive a lump sum of money before his lawyer wins or settles the case. Generally, third party investors like funding companies provide the money, with interest, but with no risk. If lawyers don’t settle or they lose the cases, plaintiffs don’t owe the finance company any money. Lawyers also benefit from legal funding. They can obtain a lump sum of money when representing clients. People on the other side consider legal funding a third party underwriting lawsuits and prolonging frivolous cases. Also, opponents consider legal funding a way for third parties to insert themselves in legal cases.

A History of Legal Funding

What isn’t up for debate is the legal funding’s history. Although legal funding sounds like a concept arising from late night “need money now” infomercials or the Internet, the concept began centuries ago outside the United States. In fact, finance litigation arose in Australia before spreading to the United Kingdom. The legal funding industry, however, didn’t reach America for some time. Once the concept did arrive in the States, the practice of third party investing in a lawsuit was banned in most English colonies. William Blackstone, in 1765, supported the ban calling investors “pests” making trouble for neighbors.