December 11, 2023

How to Choose a Funder

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Newsletter


W. Tyler Perry

|

December 11, 2023

One of my favorite concepts from the first year of law school is the idea that property is a “bundle of sticks”— i.e., “a collection of individual rights which, in certain combinations, constitute property.”  United States v. Craft , 535 U.S. 274, 278 (2002).  A fun concept in the abstract, it is increasingly of real-world import.  By way of limited example, when the notion of property as divisible rights and obligations is combined with the understanding that litigation is an asset with real value (and real risks), the power of the litigation finance and insurance revolution becomes clear: They are the tools through which a litigation’s value is extracted and exchanged, allowing you to customize your risk profile.  

In its simplest terms, litigation finance allows you to right-size upside potential and litigation insurance allows for the efficient shedding of downside risk, without concern for the vagaries of a judge and jury.  So, when I’m asked what is important in choosing a funder, my answer is simple: Choose the funder capable of providing the broadest possible array of products that most efficiently optimize the risk profile of your portfolio.  

Litigation finance allows you to capture upside potential.

Litigation finance helps companies with great claims pay their lawyers and build their businesses while their litigation is pending.  Funding works as the exchange of money today for a potential share of case proceeds tomorrow.  That exchange can happen before a case is filed, it can happen after a motion to dismiss, or even on the eve of trial.  Understanding this reality, the key differentiating factor between funders will generally be (1) the amount of money they are willing to put into a case ( i.e., is there a minimum or a maximum investment figure), (2) the size of the operation (and the attendant bureaucratic headaches), and (3) the team’s specialization ( e.g., IP, investment-treaty arbitration, etc.).  Much like the legal services industry as a whole, the risk-transfer space has its white-shoe firms, high-end boutiques, and mid-market players.  

Here are some additional criteria to consider when choosing a funder:

  1. Capital.  Always ask whether the funder has capital to fund your case or is working as a broker or advisor bringing your deals to other capital sources.
  2. Mandate.   Different funders focus on different types of cases ( e.g., domestic commercial disputes, international arbitrations, personal injury cases, etc.).  Ask whether the funder has experience funding cases like yours, and be specific about the subject matter.  Just because a funder works in the commercial space does not necessarily mean, for example, that they fund patent matters.
  3. Team.  You will want to work with an experienced team that has funded cases in the past, that knows how to execute on deals, and that has been in the litigation trenches, so that they can add value as the case proceeds.  Ask for references if necessary.
  4. Financial Terms.  While funders will not be able to provide specific terms until they study your case, it’s helpful to ask at the outset about the different kinds of returns the funder expects to receive, to ensure they match your expectations.  Different funders have different “costs of capital,” and that can make a big difference in terms of the financial proposal they offer you.
  5. “Fit.”   If you enter into a funding deal, you are entering into a multi-year relationship with that counterparty.  It is essential that you enjoy each other’s company, see the litigation in similar ways, and will be good commercial partners.  You need to like your funder.  And you should always endeavor to sit down in person with the funder before you enter into a transaction, and raise any challenging issues at the outset, so you can see how the funder navigates them.
  6. Capabilities.   Litigation funding is one important litigation risk-transfer tool, but it’s not the only one available today.  Depending on the situation, litigation insurance may be a lower-cost way to shift some of the risk and expense associated with a litigation.  You will be well-served by working with a litigation funder that also has in-house insurance capabilities, so they can explain the full breadth of product offerings available to you.  Certum Group is currently the only provider offering both litigation funding and litigation insurance solutions. 

Litigation insurance allows you to transfer and limit down-side risk.

Over the last ten years, litigation insurance has risen from an obscure boutique product to an increasingly important part of the litigation market.  At its core, litigation insurance involves the exchange of money (a premium) for protection should a particular event occur (the policy).  The amount of a particular premium is referred to as the “rate-on-line,” which is the ratio of the premium to the total payout expressed as a fraction.  

As a practical matter, the insurance products themselves come in a wide variety, including:

  1. Class Action Settlement Insurance , which is a product designed to bridge the gap between plaintiff and defendant in contentious claims-made-settlements by placing a ceiling on the aggregate claim value a company will be required to pay.  
  2. Adverse Judgment Insurance , where the insurance carrier takes on the financial risks and liabilities for businesses — at any time before settlement and for a known, fixed cost.  We most commonly see this product in the context of an M&A transaction or financing, where AJI Insurance negates the requirement for the use of escrows or indemnities.
  3. Judgement Preservation Insurance , which provides a backstop to any judgment you have received which may be subject to appeal, allowing an organization to lock in a particular judgment amount, regardless of what the court ultimately decides. 

Certum Group is uniquely placed to serve your business’s risk-transfer needs. 

Certum is the only company that offers both litigation finance and insurance.  And Certum stands out as a boutique firm with an experienced team of former litigators who have the intellectual and in-house capital resources to appropriately handle litigation of any size across any subject matter.  More importantly, however, we approach the world of litigation finance and insurance as part of the same risk-transfer ecosystem, in which both litigation funding and insurance can be utilized to protect upside value and decrease downside risk.  When paired with our team’s broad legal experience at leading defense and plaintiff-side firms, clerkships at every level of the federal system, a dedicated capital pool, and long-standing industry experience, we are uniquely positioned to identify the best products for you, provide those products under a single roof, and do so with the care and attention you would expect from any lawyer in private practice. 

The post How to Choose a Funder appeared first on Certum Group.

Certum Group Can Help

Get in touch to start discussing options.

Recent Content

People in a meeting room, sitting around a table, brainstorming. Glass wall reflects outside.
By Certum Group Team December 4, 2025
Certum Group, a leader in litigation risk management, is pleased to announce the launch of Certum Legal Solutions (CLS), a managed services organization (MSO) that helps law firms handle their day-to-day operations. CLS expands Certum Group’s platform beyond litigation finance and insurance into technology-driven operational support for law firms. With this launch, Certum is now the only provider to offer funding, insurance, and operational services through a single, integrated platform. Built by trial lawyers and experienced legal operations professionals, CLS delivers end-to-end support for mass tort and single-event litigation practices, including intake, pre-litigation investigation, plaintiff discovery support, settlement claims processing, and client communications. The CLS platform leverages proprietary and heavily customized tools such as integrations for rapid medical record collection, a mobile client app, automated document workflows, electronic signature systems, and an in house call center to streamline case management and boost efficiency. CLS currently manages thousands of cases for law firm clients across the United States and is designed to scale quickly to meet changing caseloads while maintaining control and delivering a consistent client experience. “Our clients have long relied on Certum to mitigate litigation risk and financial risk; with Certum Legal Solutions, we can now mitigate operational risk as well,” added David Diamond, Managing Director at Certum Group. “Because CLS is built the way trial lawyers think about building cases, from intake to resolution, firms get a turnkey, technology forward solution that measurably improves efficiency and outcomes,” said Asim M. Badaruzzaman, CEO of Certum Legal Solutions. CLS originated from a services operation launched in 2024 and was acquired by Certum Group in 2025. The new business line uses a customized fee for service model that aligns pricing with the scope and value of each engagement, allowing firms to avoid the capital costs and staffing requirements of building these capabilities themselves. While the initial focus is on mass tort and single event, Certum plans to extend CLS capabilities to additional practice areas over time, further expanding the company’s comprehensive approach to funding, insurance, and operational support. For more information, please contact: David Diamond Managing Director, Certum Group ddiamond@certumgroup.com Asim M. Badaruzzaman CEO, Certum Legal Solutions asim.badaruzzaman@certumlegalsolutions.com
A gavel rests on top of a stack of US one-hundred dollar bills.
By Kirstine Rogers November 6, 2025
The recent legislative push—then retreat—to impose a tax on litigation funding returns didn’t change the law, but it clarified what’s at stake. It shined a spotlight on the solution that litigation funding provides for the legal industry and to intellectual property owners. Litigation finance doesn’t present a taxation loophole to close. It’s a process that allows plaintiffs with strong claims—and limited resources—to make it to the courthouse steps. In the IP world, where the costs of litigation can eclipse the means of most inventors, startups, and universities, non-recourse litigation funding often is the only way to level the playing field. The investment risks for funders are high; the returns shouldn’t be penalized. The right policy response isn’t punitive taxation or blanket disclosure of sensitive funding terms, but acceptance of funding as a necessary tool and tailored transparency under the court’s supervision, so that financial disparity doesn’t become a tactical weapon.  The goal is simple: Keep the courthouse doors open while maintaining fairness and integrity in the adversarial system.
Statue of Lady Justice holding scales and sword, blindfolded.
By W. Tyler Perry October 23, 2025
It feels like every couple of weeks an article appears lamenting the rise of litigation finance as the death of capitalism and the birth of something monstrous. The most recent chorus began over the summer when the CEO of Chubb called litigation finance “ a hidden tax on society ” in the editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal. A month later, the CEO of The Hartford grieved on an investor call that litigation finance has “turned our judicial system into a gambling system.” And just last month, the American Property Casualty Insurance Association ’s Senior Vice President of Federal Government Relations exclaimed: “Too many baseless claims, filed by lawyers motivated by profit are clogging our legal system with unnecessary lawsuits, increasing costs and delaying swift resolution of genuine legal claims.”  As someone who has been a big firm defense lawyer, a small firm plaintiff lawyer, and now a litigation funder, I can confidently say that these arguments fundamentally misunderstand litigation finance and its incentives, while simultaneously conflating the interests of large repeat defendants with those of society writ large.