Consumer litigation funding

Echeverria v. Estate of Lindner

N.Y. Supreme Court (Nassau County) · US (NY) · 2005 · Decided

Citation/Docket: 2005 WL 1083704 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2005)

Parties & Funders

Posture: Usury challenge to advance
Funder(s) involved: (Consumer funder)

Background

A funding advance was challenged as a usurious loan where recovery on the underlying claim was effectively certain.

Holding & Outcome

Court treated the advance as a loan subject to usury limits because repayment risk was illusory.

Practical Lesson

Non-recourse labels don't control; if the funder bears no real risk, usury law can apply. Risk-of-loss analysis should be documented at underwriting.

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.

← Back to the Dispute Library