As third-party funding of litigation begins to take hold in the United States, debates about the normative value of such arrangements have heated up among scholars, practitioners, and policymakers. Meanwhile, such arrangements are up and running-providing capital for parties in various cases. As a result, while higher-level debates remain ongoing, courts have had to grapple with on-the-ground issues at the intersection of such funding arrangements and the operation of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In particular, as this essay addresses, courts have begun to deal with the question of whether and to what extent materials created in the course of obtaining and making use of third-party funding in litigation qualify for work-product protection under Rule 26.

The United States judicial system is in the midst of great and fundamental change with regard to the funding of litigation. Historically, parties financed litigation out of their own literal or figurative pockets or, perhaps with the assistance of some sort of contingent fee representation. Third-party financing of litigation was frowned upon, if not specifically forbidden. But, now, third-party litigation funding entities have begun, with much more frequency and success, to provide funding for small matters such as individual personal injury claims as well as larger commercial litigation matters between businesses. The demand for this alternative litigation finance ("ALF") clearly exists, and the supply of funding has developed despite historical obstacles. Doctrines such as champerty have faded somewhat form the legal landscape, and old fears of having litigation funded and controlled by evil actors equal to the worst villain in any Dickens novel have receded in light of the notion that everyone deserves access to justice regardless of bank account balance.

Since the first edition of this invaluable book in 2012, third-party funding has become more mainstream in international arbitration practice. However, since even the existence of a third-party funding agreement in a dispute is often kept secret, it can be difficult to glean the specifics of successful funding agreements. This welcome book, now updated, expertly reveals the nuances of third-party funding in international arbitration, examines the phenomenon in key jurisdictions, and provides a reliable resource for users and potential users that may wish to tap into and make use of this distinctive funding tool. Focusing on Australia, the United Kingdom, the United States, Germany, the Netherlands, Canada, and South Africa, the authors analyze and assess the legal regime based upon legislation, judicial opinions, ethics opinions, and practitioner anecdotes describing the state of third-party funding in each jurisdiction. In addition to updating summaries of the law of the various jurisdictions, the second edition includes a new chapter addressing third-party funding in investor-state arbitration. Among the issues raised and examined are the following: · payment of adverse costs; · “Before-the-Event” (BTE) and “After-the-Event” (ATE) insurance; · attorney financing: pro bono representation, contingency representation, conditional fee arrangements; · loans; · ethical doctrines affecting the third-party funding industry; · possible future bundling, securitization, and trading of legal claims; · risk that the funder may put its own interests ahead of the client’s interests; and · whether the existence of a funding agreement must or should be disclosed to the decision maker. The second edition also includes discussion of recent institutional developments as they relate to third-party funding, including the work of the ICCA-Queen Mary Task Force on Third-Party Funding and how third-party funding is being incorporated into arbitral rules and investment treaties. Ably providing a thorough understanding of what third-party funding entails and what legal parameters exist, this book will be of compelling interest to parties aiming to take advantage of the high values, speed, reduced evidentiary costs, outcome predictability, industry expertise, and high award enforceability characteristic of the third-party funding arrangements available in international arbitration.

Alternative assets have become popular in recent years, mainly because they offer superior returns and are uncorrelated to traditional markets. Legal finance also called lawsuit funding, lawsuit loans, pre-settlement funding, tort advances, plaintiff advances, litigation finance, litigation financing, litigation funding or dispute finance refers to investments in lawsuits. Written by a renowned expert, this book is essential reading for investors, consumers, lawyers, policymakers, business executives, and anyone who can benefit from having a clear and comprehensive framework for understanding this industry and its capacity to create more balanced and provident legal systems around the world. Join us as we explore this new market and examine the industry s most poignant issues.

The Model Rules of Professional Conduct provides an up-to-date resource for information on legal ethics. Federal, state and local courts in all jurisdictions look to the Rules for guidance in solving lawyer malpractice cases, disciplinary actions, disqualification issues, sanctions questions and much more. In this volume, black-letter Rules of Professional Conduct are followed by numbered Comments that explain each Rule's purpose and provide suggestions for its practical application. The Rules will help you identify proper conduct in a variety of given situations, review those instances where discretionary action is possible, and define the nature of the relationship between you and your clients, colleagues and the courts.

Looks at legal, economic and policy issues related to third party funding in common law, civil law jurisdictions and international contexts.