Do Legal Advances Promote Litigation or Justice?

Legal advances from lawsuit funding groups have been a serious factor in the legal system just since the 1990s. As an innovative approach to the problem of deserving plaintiffs who do not have the financial resources to pursue a lawsuit, legal advances have created opposition in a field not known for avant-garde changes. Experimentation is hardly characteristic of the legal system and the legal profession, but, apparently, the time is right for a business approach to redress what some legal groups see as an injustice.

Poor people get injured, wronged, and discriminated against, but they often cannot obtain the compensation the law allows. Those who intentionally or negligently do harm to the bodies, minds, or emotions of others escape without any consequences for their actions. It is self-evident that without legal funding individuals who cannot afford legal help would not file or proceed with a lawsuit. Are legal advances encouraging unnecessary litigation, or are they merely abetting justice?

Prevent Early Settlements

Even if a plaintiff can afford to file a lawsuit and continue it to a certain point, a lack of money may force the plaintiff into a premature settlement. This unfortunate ending means not only that the plaintiff does not receive adequate compensation for injuries or wrongs, but will be saddled with legal bills that may eat up most or all of the settlement. It is not uncommon for plaintiffs in these circumstances to wish they had never brought the lawsuit in the first place.

One of the purposes of litigation financing groups is to prevent premature settlements that diminish a plaintiff's proper award. Enabling a plaintiff with a righteous cause of action to proceed is only fair. By providing adequate funds to permit the lawsuit to reach its appropriate conclusion, these groups do a service to the cause of justice.