It's about Time: A System Thinking Analysis of the Litigation Finance Industry and Its Effect on Settlement

IF 2.5 2区 社会学 Q1 Social Sciences
M. Rodak
{"title":"It's about Time: A System Thinking Analysis of the Litigation Finance Industry and Its Effect on Settlement","authors":"M. Rodak","doi":"10.2307/40041312","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The developing litigation finance industry is applauded by those who champion its access-granting and bargaining-power-equalizing functions for low-income plaintiffs in civil suits, and derided by those who warn of its unsavory business practices and interference with settlement efforts. With no current body of law adequately addressing the potential problems this burgeoning industry creates, it is vital to develop an approach to litigation finance that protects both the integrity of the settlement process and consumer interests. Such an approach simultaneously must avoid excessive regulation that effectively hinders court access by precluding disadvantaged plaintiffs with viable claims from having their days in court. Applying systems thinking to the field of litigation finance and its effect on settlement reveals a simple objective that would best achieve the necessary balance between this new field’s angels and demons: reducing the time delay currently plaguing civil courts. Part I of this Comment explores the general structure, history, and current status of litigation finance, identifying the circumstances that stimulated its creation and describing its prototypical operation. Part I also briefly reviews existing legal doctrines that have been, or could potentially be, used to regulate litigation finance, including champerty, usury, and contract law. Part II examines the widely diverging viewpoints about the litigation finance industry, focusing in","PeriodicalId":48012,"journal":{"name":"University of Pennsylvania Law Review","volume":"155 1","pages":"503"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2006-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/40041312","citationCount":"25","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"University of Pennsylvania Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/40041312","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 25

Abstract

The developing litigation finance industry is applauded by those who champion its access-granting and bargaining-power-equalizing functions for low-income plaintiffs in civil suits, and derided by those who warn of its unsavory business practices and interference with settlement efforts. With no current body of law adequately addressing the potential problems this burgeoning industry creates, it is vital to develop an approach to litigation finance that protects both the integrity of the settlement process and consumer interests. Such an approach simultaneously must avoid excessive regulation that effectively hinders court access by precluding disadvantaged plaintiffs with viable claims from having their days in court. Applying systems thinking to the field of litigation finance and its effect on settlement reveals a simple objective that would best achieve the necessary balance between this new field’s angels and demons: reducing the time delay currently plaguing civil courts. Part I of this Comment explores the general structure, history, and current status of litigation finance, identifying the circumstances that stimulated its creation and describing its prototypical operation. Part I also briefly reviews existing legal doctrines that have been, or could potentially be, used to regulate litigation finance, including champerty, usury, and contract law. Part II examines the widely diverging viewpoints about the litigation finance industry, focusing in
是时候了:诉讼金融业的系统思维分析及其对和解的影响
发展中的诉讼金融行业受到一些人的称赞,这些人支持它在民事诉讼中为低收入原告提供准入许可和平等议价权的功能,但也受到一些人的嘲笑,他们警告称,诉讼金融行业存在令人不快的商业行为,并会干扰和解努力。由于目前没有法律充分解决这个新兴行业产生的潜在问题,因此开发一种既能保护和解过程的完整性又能保护消费者利益的诉讼融资方法至关重要。这种方法同时必须避免过度的监管,这种监管通过排除具有可行索赔的弱势原告在法庭上的日子而有效地阻碍了法院的准入。将系统思维应用于诉讼金融领域及其对和解的影响,揭示了一个简单的目标,可以最好地实现这一新领域的天使和恶魔之间的必要平衡:减少目前困扰民事法院的时间延迟。本评论的第一部分探讨了诉讼金融的总体结构、历史和现状,确定了刺激其产生的环境,并描述了其原型运作。第一部分还简要回顾了已经或可能用于规范诉讼财务的现有法律理论,包括钱庄法、高利贷法和合同法。第二部分考察了关于诉讼金融行业的广泛分歧的观点,重点是
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信