How Usury & Other Consumer Lending Regulations Can Affect Litigation Finance Agreements
Every state has usury laws that limit the amount of interest that a lender can charge a borrower. Because litigation
Read moreEvery state has usury laws that limit the amount of interest that a lender can charge a borrower. Because litigation
Read moreWhen someone wants to argue that litigation financing is either immoral or illegal, they often invoke the common-law doctrines of
Read moreWashington is another state with an appropriately progressive attitude towards litigation financing. Although Washington courts have not ruled on the
Read moreTexas has a long tradition of promoting entrepreneurship and economic innovation. That tradition is carried forward in the way in
Read moreSouth Carolina recognizes that banning litigation financing is not necessary to prevent frivolous litigation and abuse of process. In 2000,
Read moreOregon is another state that recognizes that the reasons for champerty doctrine ended long ago, making it an archaic relic
Read moreLike many other states, North Carolina does not prohibit a third party from providing financial support to a party that
Read moreNew York provides a hospitable environment for litigation finance. New York courts recognize the doctrine of champerty, but they only
Read moreMichigan is one of the relatively few states that have directly addressed the question whether litigation finance agreements are enforceable,
Read moreMassachusetts law is hospitable to litigation finance agreements, but it imposes a general rule of reasonableness on those agreements. In
Read more