Texas Court of Appeals · US (TX) · 2006 · Decided
Citation/Docket: 193 S.W.3d 87 (Tex. App. 2006)
Posture: Funded party resisted repayment
Funder(s) involved: (Investor-funders)
After winning its underlying case, Anglo-Dutch resisted paying funders, arguing the agreements were usurious loans and champertous.
Court enforced the agreements, not loans (repayment contingent), not champertous, not against Texas public policy.
The contingent-repayment structure is what keeps commercial funding outside usury statutes; funded parties' 'buyer's remorse' defenses usually fail in Texas.
Matters like this one often turn on expert testimony, on valuation, industry custom and practice, legal ethics, or damages. The Institute partners with world-class expert witness referral companies for this purpose.
Compiled from public sources (court filings, published opinions, and secondary reporting) as part of the Institute's Phase 1 Dispute Library research. This is educational material, not legal advice; case citations should be independently verified before relied upon.