Ethical Issues in Litigation Finance (Update)

Production Date: February 09, 2018 Practice Areas: Ethics and Litigation Estimated Length: 3828 minutes


$ 59 Ethics and Litigation In Stock

The use of litigation financing has engendered spirited debate within the legal community. Attorney ethics requirements are a central focus of this debate. Issues including whether a funder’s investment impacts an attorney’s duty to use independent professional judgment, avoid conflicts of interest and protect the attorney-client and work product privileges all give rise to questions within the bar.

In this engaging and informative program, taught by Legal Counsel for litigation finance company Bentham IMF, participants will learn how to use litigation funding as a modern means of ensuring that meritorious cases get the commitment of resources they deserve. The speakers will address the basics of litigation finance and how the applicable Rules of Professional Responsibility intersect with litigation funding, as well the notable legal decisions that have impacted the litigation funding industry in 2017. A detailed appendix will be provided containing the ethics opinions and additional contents discussed during the program.

Learning Objectives:

  1. Review the evolution and foundations of litigation finance
  2. Consider the ways that litigation finance and attorney ethics intersect, including a discussion of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct, including Model Rule1.7(a)(2) (material-limitations conflicts rule); Model Rule 1.8(a) (regulation of business transactions with clients); Model Rule 1.8(e) (financial assistance to clients); Model Rule 1.8(i) (acquiring a proprietary interest in a client’s cause of action); Model Rule 2.3 (hybrid confidentiality rules governing provision of evaluations to third party)
  3. Discuss the impact of recent legal case decisions on the subject, including In re DesignLine Corporation, 565 B.R. 341 (2017), Kelly, Grossman & Flanagan, LLP v Quick Cash, Inc. 2012 NY Slip Op 50560(U) (NY Sup. 2012), Maslowski v. Prospect Funding Holdings, LLC, No. A16-0770, 2017 WL 562532 (Minn. Ct. 2017), Boling v. Prospect Funding Holdings, LLC, No. 1:14-CV-00081 (W.D. Ky. 2015), Telesocial v. Orange, No. 3:14-cv-03985 (N.D. Cal. 2015), Viamedia, Inc. v. Comcast Corp., et al., 1:16-cv-05486 (N.D. 2016), AVM Technologies, LLC v. Intel Corporation, 15-33-RG (D. Del. 2013), Lambeth Magnetic Structures, LLC v. Seagate Technology (US) Holdings, Inc., et al., 2:16-cv-00538 (W.D. Pa. 2017)
  4. Ethically integrate litigation financing into every step of litigation strategy (including on appeal)
Andrew C.
Auburn, NY

This was a quality presentation -- very informative on an issue not well known to most.

Mark B.
Austin, TX

Great course. Litigation funding is a complex area.

Christina C.
Albuquerque, NM

Good speakers. I bet they're great salesmen. I enjoyed listening to them!