))
Mass Tort Litigation or Asset Sale? How Litigation Funding Blurs the Lines
Manage episode 424197827 series 3446680
Content provided by The Corporate Law Center at Fordham University School of Law. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by The Corporate Law Center at Fordham University School of Law or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.
Is litigation funding driving the next big wave of mass tort cases and if so, what incentives does that create? Samir Parikh and Emily Siegel join the podcast today to help us explore the $15 billion litigation finance industry. Samir, a professor of corporate and bankruptcy law at Wake Forest Law, discusses the opaque nature of some financiers and their influence on mass tort litigation, often prioritizing profit over justice. Emily shares her perspective as a senior reporter at Bloomberg Law, highlighting the growing role of key players driving opaque capital – like sanctioned Russian actors operating as hedge funds – and the potential risks involved, including national security concerns. As financiers increasingly view mass tort disputes through the prism of an asset sale, they inevitably reshape the legal landscape, trigger ethical dilemmas for attorneys, and risk flooding the system with non-meritorious claims. Despite the controversies, litigation finance can level the playing field, offering a lifeline to claimants with legitimate cases. But as more money flows into mass tort disputes, less focus is placed on justice for victims. Tune in to explore the complexities and implications of litigation funding in mass torts and find out why transparency and regulation are more crucial than ever.
Key Points From This Episode:
- How litigation funding is driving mass tort cases.
- Introducing today’s guests, Samir Parikh and Emily Siegel.
- Key players driving opaque capital, including highly aggressive private equity firms.
- Samir's explanation of opaque capital financiers' profit motives.
- Why many modern tort cases more closely resemble asset sales than litigation.
- The risks that various parties face in mass tort litigation when it is funded by opaque capital.
- Emily’s findings on how Russian billionaires are avoiding sanctions by funding lawsuits.
- Why a lack of reporting requirements for funding litigation could pose a national security risk.
- Key questions raised by the Johnson & Johnson mass tort case and the potential of a future litigation regarding “forever chemicals.”
- The Daubert Standard in mass tort claims and the impact it has on funder decisions.
- Why mass torts are particularly attractive to litigation financiers.
- Ethical obligations in mass tort cases and how the attorney-client relationship is at risk.
- The impact of litigation funding on corporate defendants.
- A reminder that many legitimate financiers do a lot of good and the value that they add.
- How legitimate litigation financiers help meritorious claimants gain access to justice.
- The biggest risks posed by the new Arizona state law regarding mass tort cases.
- An overview of non-meritorious claims threatening system integrity.
- Why robust regulations and disclosures are necessary.
Links Mentioned in Today’s Episode:
Emily Siegel on LinkedIn
Bite-Sized Business Law Episode 30: The Opaque Capital Fueling Mass Tort Litigation
‘Opaque Capital and Mass Tort Financing’
'Putin’s Billionaires Dodge Sanctions by Financing Lawsuits (1)
56 episodes
Share
