September 27, 2022

How to Win More by Risking Less

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Newsletter


Joel Fineberg

|

September 27, 2022

In-house counsel and law firms have an unprecedented opportunity to apply systematic innovation to the way they approach litigation. For a fixed premium cost, it is now possible to pursue risk transfer on threatened or active litigation, portfolio risk, or work-in-progress, and in the process open up value in the form of increased certainty, efficiency, funding, and cash. Additionally, companies can monetize untapped litigation assets, thereby generating immediate revenue while removing the outcome uncertainty.

Put another way: it is now possible to win more by risking less.

The key for both law firms and in-house counsel is to embrace an innovative mindset as they approach their portfolio of cases. Here are three strategies–three new ways of thinking–to help make that happen:

Litigation exposure can create a cash drain to cover litigation expenses, significant financial risk from known or pending litigation, and massive inefficiencies impacting a company’s P&L from settlement or judgment. Whether you are going to trial or you have already received an adverse judgment you plan to appeal, litigation requires time, money, and human capital. But what if you didn’t need to maintain reserves for your exposures? By transferring litigation risk, you eliminate the outcome risk, remove reserves, increase liquidity, and likely increase the company’s enterprise value all at the same time.

Here is a real-world example: We worked with a major, highly-leveraged manufacturer experiencing an exposure of $250 million. We assisted them in negotiating a $30 million settlement; but, reducing the top-line exposure was not its only obstacle. If the company signed the proposed settlement agreement, its auditors, applying well-recognized GAAP accounting principles, were requiring the company to post 100 percent of the liability on its P&L. This would have tripped its loan covenants, thereby accelerating all debt and forcing the company into bankruptcy. Using insurance, the company transferred the payout risk of the judgment to a carrier in exchange for a single premium at a fraction of the total judgment exposure. This creative risk transfer solution kept the company in compliance with its loan covenants, helped maintain shareholder value, and ultimately saved the company from bankruptcy or liquidation. It resolved legacy liability, recapitalized, and turned around the business. Risk transfer solved a substantial liability and saved that company.

This example underscores why our Class Action Settlement Insurance (CASI) and Litigation Buyout Insurance (LBO) can be uniquely advantageous for corporations and law firms. They create an asset that guarantees the payment of a liability. So, instead of tripping a loan covenant or having to account for a massive liability every quarter, it is possible to simply buy certainty with a one-time premium. You can offset even multimillion-dollar notional settlements or litigation from your balance sheet. Ultimately, the sooner businesses think of solutions like CASI or LBO in a litigation cycle, the greater their possible wins.

Funding opportunities have inundated the marketplace. Yet even as competition drives down prices, traditional litigation funding continues to be expensive for law firms and corporations. One reason is that most litigation funding is non-recourse debt based upon the outcome of uncertain litigation. Risk drives the cost.

Historically, companies seek litigation funding. Then, the litigation funders, in turn, look to the insurance markets to remove some or all the outcome risk. What if the process was reversed and the company or law firm obtained risk transfer of the outcome of the litigation first? Using risk transfer to guarantee the outcome of litigation, the cost of capital is lower, reflecting the outcome certainty and capital preservation provided by insurance. This approach is a win for companies and law firms seeking funding. Additionally, once the outcome risk is removed, the ability to obtain efficient, non-recourse funding is far more likely. At Risk Settlements, we can underwrite specific or portfolio litigation risk and then package insurance and funding to provide the optimal litigation finance structure.

Too often, companies don’t realize that they can leverage their litigation portfolio like any other company asset. For example, we provided immediate monetization of contingent antitrust cases which generated immediate revenue for companies and removed all outcome and timing risk. By electing certainty, these companies received immediate value from an untapped asset that might not have been unlocked for a long time, and potentially, at a lower value.

The risk outcome is always binary for companies – win or lose – and it’s their job to be right 100% of the time. Sophisticated litigation underwriters can look for untapped sources in the market and use risk transfer to help clients turn what they view as having little value into immediate value. Quite simply, with risk transfer, we give our clients a way out of the trap of binary outcomes by solving for risk in a revolutionary new way.

A decade ago, litigation funding was novel—now, it’s a given that the biggest law firms utilize big funders. Similarly, sophisticated funders are already using litigation insurance today. But many companies have yet to unlock all that litigation risk transfer solutions have to offer, whether it be newer companies looking for agile solutions that keep them on the cutting edge or established players looking to benefit from pure financial arbitrage. In either case, the future of litigation is securing winning results by reducing risk.

This article was originally published on lexology.com.

The post How to Win More by Risking Less 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.