In the UK it's already in-place. And Peter Thiel's financing of "Hulk Hogan v. Gawker" was an informal way of going about that.
Some tort reformers such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce rant against it. They contend it will generate frivolous lawsuits.
Some of those seeking the right of the not-wealthy to sue are bullish about this concept. You don't have to be a deep pocket to take on the powers that be.
Well, Joe Patrice at Abovethelaw warns us that investing in litigation is hardly a done deal in the U.S. Here is Patrice's coverage.
Essentially, on December 14, 2016, there will be a seminal hearing before Judge Paul Diamond. As Patrice notes:
"The case involves Liberia's biggest importer, Lebanese-owned AJA against Cigna over damages incurred in Liberia's civil war. "
The case is old. Judge Diamond is requiring the investors in this litigation to show up for the hearing. If they don't they could be liable for damages beyond their original investment.
How do you like them apples? By making a lawsuit possible, you the investor can be taking on a type of liability. That will be beyond the risk you have assumed in betting on the litigation in the first place.
Given this, Thiel should be relieved that Gawker and its head Nick Denton settled the lawsuit. It's over. Otherwise, Thiel the investor could have be liable for who knows what. Gawker, for example, could have counter-sued. The ways of the law are unpredictable. That's exactly why there are investors who won't go near litigation funding.
The world has changed. Contact Jane Genova for complimentary consultation to get the competitive edge in your marketing communications (email@example.com).