Champerty & maintenance

Justinian Capital SPC v. WestLB AG

New York Court of Appeals · US (NY) · 2016 · Decided

Citation/Docket: 65 N.E.3d 1253 (N.Y. 2016)

Parties & Funders

Posture: Assignee vs. bank defendant
Funder(s) involved: Justinian Capital (claim purchaser)

Background

Justinian acquired distressed notes for the sole purpose of suing WestLB, with no genuine obligation to pay the purchase price.

Holding & Outcome

Held champertous under N.Y. Jud. Law § 489; sham purchase fell outside the statute's safe harbor.

Practical Lesson

New York's champerty statute is alive for claim acquisitions: real consideration, genuinely at risk, is what separates lawful claim purchases from champerty.

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