Lawsuit Finance Blog

Have you been injured in an accident that was not your fault? Have you missed a substantial amount of time from work? Have you hired an attorney and sued the person, persons or entity responsible for your injuries and disability? If so, your golden, right? Well, maybe....

What if the disability from work lasts longer than you expected? What if the lawsuit takes much longer to resolve than you expected? What if you can't get a quick trial date or an early, satisfactory, settlement offer? What if your case proceeds to trial and the result is appealed, a process that can take years? What if your savings run out before a fair settlement is achieved? What do you do when you run out of money before your lawsuit reaches the promised land or your health returns (if it returns) to pre-accident state?

Whether you have been injured in an auto accident, slip and fall accident or construction accident, or any other kind of accident, these serious questions could apply to you. Whether you have been injured in the operating room or through a misdiagnosis caused by medical malpractice, by a defective product, or mauled by your neighbor's pit bull, these are serious questions that require serious answers. If the principal family breadwinner is killed in an airplane accident, automobile accident, construction accident, sports accident, train accident or an accident at sea, you are entitled to pursue damages for your injuries and/or loss; however, justice does not always come swiftly or inexpensively. Developing financial problems after a serious injury or death in the family adds serious insult upon devastating injury. Where do you turn to for help?

Your first thought is, probably, your lawyer, right? Your lawyer will certainly provide you the best legal service he can possibly provide, but, under most state codes of professional liability, a lawyer must avoid acquiring an interest in his/her client's litigation. In short, a lawyer cannot loan his client money under the disciplinary rules of most states. You can turn to a family member or friend, but slow or no repayment will effect that important relationship for years to come. You can ask a bank, but unless you have substantial collateral for a loan and are willing to put that collateral (house, car, jewelry) at risk if you lose the case, you may be risking everything. What do you do? Where do you go?

Lawsuit Funding or pre-settlement funding from Lawsuit Financial is the obvious answer to these very serious, life-altering questions. You can acquire a no-risk, legal cash advance against the anticipated recovery in your lawsuit, without risking your home, car or other valuable asset. You see, lawsuit financing from Lawsuit Financial is known as "non-recourse" lawsuit funding; repayment is contingent upon the outcome in your case. In other words, if the lawsuit is unsuccessful, you don't owe Lawsuit Financial a dime. The obligation is completely excused. Lawsuit advances like these can be expensive if you win your case, so you are cautioned to use the service wisely and only under necessary circumstances, but Lawsuit Financial does what even your lawyer can't do: We guarantee you a case recovery equal to the amount of money we advance, because, if you lose your personal injury case, you do not have to pay us back.

You may now be asking: How do I get started? The process is simple. You may call Lawsuit Financial, toll free, at 1-877-377-SUIT (7848) and get free advice and case analysis over the phone, from one of our very experienced legal assistants or from our company CEO. Or, if you are telephone shy, you can fill out a simple, one page, funding intake form at www.lawsuitfinancial.com. Almost everything else we need will come from inquiries and discussions with your lawyer.

If you are shopping around for legal funding services, here are a few tips:

1. Seek funding only for a serious need. If you are looking for money for anything that is not essential (food, car payments, clothing, shelter (rent, mortgage payments, foreclosure avoidance), medical treatment, prescriptions, surgery) you probably should wait until you have a serious need for the money.

2. If your need is so great that you are considering an insurance company's offer of settlement against your attorney's advice, it is time to consider legal finance.

3. Seek lawsuit funding that appropriately fits into the projected value of your case. These legal advances are expensive if your case is successful (free if you lose). You only wish a lawsuit financing company to own a right to a small part of your case. You're the one who was hurt; you deserve your money.

4. Make sure that the lawsuit funding company has a hands off policy as to the handling of the case. You and your attorney do not want to be answering to or discussing settlement or trial strategy with a legal funding company.

5. Make sure that the litigation funding is non-recourse, or contingent on the outcome of the litigation. That way, if you lose the case, the repayment obligation is excused.

6. Seek case funding companies that provide legal financing on a flat fee basis and not by charging monthly compounded interest (also, will the litigation finance company provide an appropriate compromise?-see below).

7. Ask Questions. Is the lawsuit finance company and company representative experienced? How long has it been in business? Does it engage in pre-settlement funding on a national level? Are the company and company representatives principals or brokers? Do they have extensive legal and/or financial experience? Will the litigation funding company compromise its fees if the case results are far below the value predicted at the time the lawsuit cash advance is made?

7. Get free advice from Lawsuit Financial. We will analyze your legal funding situation for free; we will even provide you an honest appraisal of a competitor's offer.

Pre settlement legal financing is not for everyone and should be considered only as a last resort. The right lawsuit financial company and the right lawsuit cash advance at the right time can make a huge difference in your lawsuit's recovery. Don't take the insurance company's low ball offer against your attorney's advice. Consider lawsuit financing from Lawsuit Financial, instead. Call us, toll free, at 1-877-377-SUIT(7848) or visit www.lawsuitfinancial.com today.

Posted by Mark Bello of Lawsuit Financial Corp. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Lawsuit Funding Tip of the Day

Bookmark:

It was inevitable; the family of the victim of the now famous chimp attack has filed a $50 Million lawsuit against the chimp owner. The lawsuit alleges that the chimp's owner, Sandra Herold, knew that the chimp had "exhibited aggressive behavior" to other people in the past and had "failed to take sufficient actions to safeguard third parties from the wild animal". The victim and the chimp's owner were friends and the chimp, named Travis, which weighed a hefty 200 pounds, had been a family pet since infancy.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of plaintiff, Charla Nash, by the firm of Willinger, Willinger and Bucci who have petitioned the court to freeze the defendant's assets. A key issue in the case is whether a "wild" animal should ever be a pet in someone's home. In this case, that theory could be buttressed if the alleged prior "aggressive behavior" can be demonstrated. Attorney Charles Willinger, a named partner in plaintiff's law firm said that "these animals are wild, wild animals and have no business being in anyone's home". He stated that the dangerous condition presented by the wild animal creates strict liability in the case. The lawsuit describes the plaintiff's injuries as loss of both hands and traumatic facial injuries including loss of nose, upper and lower lips, eyelids and the bony structures in the face. The plaintiff is in critical condition at the Cleveland Clinic.

This lawsuit appears unusual; the elements of a chimpanzee or wild animal seem to make it so, but, in legal circles, animal attack cases are not at all unusual. This is very similar to a domestic dog or cat attack under homeowner liability and animal attack statutes. In most jurisdictions, homeowners are strictly liable for injuries resulting from unprovoked pet attacks against social or business invitees. The law is very clear and simple in cases like this and strict liability (if there was no provocation) will probably apply here. The fact that this was a wild animal might result in a finding of gross negligence in this case, and may outrage the trier of fact, but that may be the only real difference between wild and domestic animal cases.

Lawsuit Financial Corporation is a leading provider of lawsuit funding for dog bite cases and will provide lawsuit financing for any animal attack victim where provocation is not a serious issue and where there is a valid homeowners insurance policy.

Why might a victim need lawsuit funding you ask? Because insurance companies have money, power and all the time in the world. The money allocated to settle the victim's case will sit in their bank account until they are forced to pay it. A broke and disabled plaintiff is not a positive influence on settlement negotiations and, without lawsuit financial support, the plaintiff might not be able to hold out for full case value. A timely lawsuit cash advance may prevent an early and cheap settlement of the case and assist the plaintiff in achieving a full value recovery; that is the result that Lawsuit Financial seeks to achieve every single time it participates in an injury case. Call Lawsuit Financial, toll free, at 1-877-377-SUIT (7848) and get free, professional advice about your legal funding situation. Or visit us on the web at www.lawsuitfinancial.com.

Posted by Mark Bello of Lawsuit Financial Corp. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Legal Funding Lawsuit of the Day

Bookmark:

I read an interesting article in the New York Times that I want to share with my readers. Apparently, sitting jurors have been using their iPhones and Blackberrys to research the parties and cases they are being ask to render verdict upon and sending the information they find to friends and family. For those of you who don't know, jurors are supposed to render verdicts based solely on evidence heard in the confines of the courtroom and ruled admissible by the presiding judge. Jurors are not permitted to pursue answers or data outside of the courtroom. Evidence ruled inadmissible is supposed to be unavailable to them and they are not permitted to consider it. In today's technological society, a juror can access the web on his/her mobile phone and seek the information that was excluded in court, in direct violation of a judicial order or the rules of evidence in state or federal court. Secret deliberations and opinions are being texted to friends, direct from the jury room!

The article reports that several juries and verdicts are suspect in state and federal court and in civil and criminal trials. It provides numerous examples of abuse. When a single juror in Florida federal drug trial admitted that had done case research online (violating a specific judicial instruction), eight other jurors confessed to the same misconduct. A mistrial was declared, after eight weeks of trial, costing taxpayers a fortune. In Arkansas, a $12.6 million verdict in a civil trial may be overturned because a juror was "Twittering" updates throughout the trial.

In the federal corruption trial of a former Pennsylvania state senator, the article reports, a juror posted trial updates on Twitter and Facebook; while the senator was found guilty, the centerpiece of the appeal will, most certainly, be the Twitter and Facebook activities conducted by this juror.

An automobile accident case can be effected by a juror's examination of an intersection, or the distance between two points, by using Google Maps. In a medical malpractice case, a medical condition or procedure can be researched on WebMD or Wikipedia. Expert witnesses, patent or product histories, and attorneys involved in a case can be researched at various expert, legal and news sites.

The technological circumvention of long established court and evidence rules is a serious issue and creates the potential of a systematic denial of justice in civil and criminal trials throughout the United States. The article indicates that the number cases "disrupted" by Internet use is unknown but opines that mobile phone technology and easy access to the Web will certainly increase in the months and years to come. Court officers can ban mobile phones from the courtroom, but, unless jurors are sequestered, easy access is available at home.

What do I think? I believe that judges must be very specific and forceful in their instructions about these issues. They need to exercise firm control of their courtrooms. Jurors need to be carefully and fully instructed on the rules, what is excluded, what is admissible. Judges must mention that the use of the Internet is taboo and indicate examples of sites (Google, Twitter, Wikipedia, Facebook, etc.) where misconduct has occurred. They, and the attorneys involved, should advise that the rules of court and evidence have been around for centuries and that only evidence admitted in the courtroom can be considered in rendering a verdict. The article suggests, and I agree, that judges must call on fellow jurors to keep their brother or sister jurors "in line". Most people want to do the right thing; some just need to be shown the way. I know that a promise of appropriate behavior is just that and actions speak louder than words, but educating jurors on what is misconduct in the courtroom and out will go a long way to resolving some of these problems.

If you or someone you love have been seriously injured in an automobile accident caused by a drunk driver or any negligent driver, or in any other type of accident, Lawsuit Financial would like to provide assistance. If you have retained a lawyer and filed an auto accident lawsuit, we can get you a lawsuit cash advance against your pending personal injury lawsuit. Call us, toll free, at 1-877-377-SUIT (7848) or visit us on the web at www.lawsuitfinancial.com. The call or the visit are free; the advice may be priceless.

Posted by Mark Bello of Lawsuit Financial Corp. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Lawsuit Funding Thought of the Day

Bookmark:

The United States Supreme Court decided the highly anticipated Wyeth v. Levine case, yesterday. In its 6 to 3 decision, the court said said Congress could have required pre-emption in the case but did not. Instead, said Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for the majority, “it determined that widely available state rights of action provided appropriate relief for injured consumers.” Justice Stevens distinguished this case from the recently decided Riegel case where Congress had adopted an express pre-emption provision for medical devices. Justice Stevens wrote, that the drug agency had, in the past, welcomed state injury lawsuits to complement federal regulation. But in “a dramatic change in position” in 2006 [engineered by the Bush administration], the agency reversed that long held position despite its “limited resources to monitor the 11,000 drugs on the market.”

Justices Anthony M. Kennedy, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer joined in Justice Stevens majority opinion. Conservative Justice Clarence Thomas voted with the majority but wrote a separate opinion, stating his objection to “far-reaching implied pre-emption doctrines” tending to “wander far from the statutory text.”

This is a wonderful pro-justice decision; a ruling for the drug industry would have meant almost total immunity to the drug industry for an FDA approved drug, whether it maims (as Phenergan did to Diana Levine) or kills, as Vioxx and Fen Phen have done to hundreds.

As reported previously, at this location, my state, Michigan, has such a legal standard: Michigan law, passed in 1996, during the very conservative, anti-justice Engler administration, provides total immunity to the drug industry for FDA approved drugs. This law has been a disaster for Michigan citizens, maimed and/or killed by dangerous FDA approved drugs, with no chance to hold the manufacturer liable for damages. The lack of compensation in these cases leaves Michigan taxpayers to pay the bill for victims' treatment or death instead of the billion dollar companies that caused these injuries and/or death.

Dr. Henry Greenspan, who teaches about the FDA, ethics and policy at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, wrote a terrific op-ed piece in the March 4, 2009 edition of the Detroit Free Press, calling Michigan's drug law "meritless". He views the Opinion of the Court as asserting "that Congress never intended FDA regulation to trump state law, and neither did the FDA itself". Dr. Greenspan believes that Michigan’s drug industry immunity law "cedes to FDA a power that the full spectrum of the justices — from liberals like Ruth Bader Ginsburg to conservatives like Clarence Thomas — rejected as “meritless,” “untenable” and “without reasoned explanation.”"

The Wyeth decision will not remedy Michigan law. Only Michigan's own courts or its legislature can do that. According to Greenspan's article, the Michigan House of Representatives voted, in 2007, 70-39, to rescind the law, but the state Senate killed it in follow-up committee.

My advice? If you are a Michigan citizen, contact your state Senator and/or State Representative and tell them that it is time that Michigan joined the other 49 states in the union and protected its citizens from these dangerous drugs and from the people who make them. Tell them that the ability to hold drug makers accountable for bad drugs not only supports simple justice, but is a significant deterrent to the creation of unsafe products like Phenergan. There are current bills under consideration in the Michigan House to rescind these laws. Make your state Senator or Representative tell you where they stand on this important legislation. If they are against it, make them explain, as Dr. Greenspan puts it, "why it is reasonable to continue to strip Michiganders of rights that are held by citizens in every other state" and why "they know better than two-thirds of the Supreme Court". Yes, March 4, 2009 was a good day for justice in 49 of our United States; justice continues to be denied in Michigan.Thousands of lives have been harmed; take action before this cruel legislation harms thousands more. Let them know that they will be held accountable in the next election.

Lawsuit Financial is a nationwide lawsuit funding company that provides litigation plaintiffs with interim lawsuit financing while they wait for their litigation to resolve. This important lawsuit financial service is available for many drug liability cases and for auto accidents and/or any other type of personal injury case. Please visit our website at www.lawsuitfinancial.com our call us, toll free, at 1-877-377-SUIT(7848).

Posted by Mark Bello of Lawsuit Financial Corp. | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Legal Funding Case of the Day

Bookmark: