Archive for the ‘Law’ Category
SEC Proposes Anti-Fraud Rules to More Closely Regulate Hedge Funds & Certain Venture Capital Funds
Robert Masud asked:
Recently, the SEC proposed changes that would affect the investment in hedge funds as well as other pooled investments. On December 27,2006, Release No. 33-8766 (the “Release”) proposed an anti-fraud rule that would be new under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the “Advisers Act”). This new rule revised criteria for admission for individuals that invest in some private funds (excluding some venture capital funds). The Release says that these rules are meant to cover two of the SEC’s particular areas of interest.
Accredited Investor
The Release suggested new standards for individuals that may invest in certain funds privately offered as an enhanced definition of “accredited investor.” These funds are exempt from the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”) by provisions of Section 3(c)(1). New standards would require “accredited investors” to fulfill the previous standards plus not own investments totalling less than US$2.5 million as a qualified purchaser under the Section 3(c)(1) exemptions. Under Regulation D of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, require a net worth of over $1 million (individual or joint net worth with spouse), or have an income over $200K each year over the past two years (or joint income with a spouse of over $300K in each of those two years plus an expectation to stay at the income level for the current year).
Anti-fraud Regulations
Section 206(4) of the Advisers Act has a new proposed anti-fraud rule that would prohibit investment advisers from making statements to investors in pooled investments it manages that would be misleading or false, regardless of whether the investment is registered or unregistered (including hedge funds). The management company also many not participate in fraudulent, manipulative, or other deceptive behavior.
The rule would allow the investors to be viewed through the fund, and reverses one of the effects of the U.S. Court of Appeals decision in Phillip Goldstein, et al, v. SEC. In this case, the SEC’s 2004 requirement for hedge fund advisers to count investors in that particular fund to determine if registration is neceaary was overturned. The new rule is meant to assure that the anit-fraud provisions apply to future and prospective investors and not just to the current pool.
The Release also stated that the new rule was made intentionally broad to outline “the making of materially false or misleading statements as a fraudulent, deceptive or manipulative practice, and to prohibit other practices that defraud or deceive pool investors, rather than designed to prohibit a specific practice.” It would regulate practices and statements made to current and prospective investment clients, and would provide for, among other things, representations made in account statements and memoranda.
Investment advisers to pooled investment vehicles as well as advisers that are not required to be registered under the Advisers Act, are covered in this new rule as well. The SEC stated in the Release that “it is critical that we continue to be in a position to bring actions against unregistered advisers that manage pools and that defraud investors in those pools.”
Commercial Loans to 65% of Value
Recently, the SEC proposed changes that would affect the investment in hedge funds as well as other pooled investments. On December 27,2006, Release No. 33-8766 (the “Release”) proposed an anti-fraud rule that would be new under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the “Advisers Act”). This new rule revised criteria for admission for individuals that invest in some private funds (excluding some venture capital funds). The Release says that these rules are meant to cover two of the SEC’s particular areas of interest.
Accredited Investor
The Release suggested new standards for individuals that may invest in certain funds privately offered as an enhanced definition of “accredited investor.” These funds are exempt from the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”) by provisions of Section 3(c)(1). New standards would require “accredited investors” to fulfill the previous standards plus not own investments totalling less than US$2.5 million as a qualified purchaser under the Section 3(c)(1) exemptions. Under Regulation D of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, require a net worth of over $1 million (individual or joint net worth with spouse), or have an income over $200K each year over the past two years (or joint income with a spouse of over $300K in each of those two years plus an expectation to stay at the income level for the current year).
Anti-fraud Regulations
Section 206(4) of the Advisers Act has a new proposed anti-fraud rule that would prohibit investment advisers from making statements to investors in pooled investments it manages that would be misleading or false, regardless of whether the investment is registered or unregistered (including hedge funds). The management company also many not participate in fraudulent, manipulative, or other deceptive behavior.
The rule would allow the investors to be viewed through the fund, and reverses one of the effects of the U.S. Court of Appeals decision in Phillip Goldstein, et al, v. SEC. In this case, the SEC’s 2004 requirement for hedge fund advisers to count investors in that particular fund to determine if registration is neceaary was overturned. The new rule is meant to assure that the anit-fraud provisions apply to future and prospective investors and not just to the current pool.
The Release also stated that the new rule was made intentionally broad to outline “the making of materially false or misleading statements as a fraudulent, deceptive or manipulative practice, and to prohibit other practices that defraud or deceive pool investors, rather than designed to prohibit a specific practice.” It would regulate practices and statements made to current and prospective investment clients, and would provide for, among other things, representations made in account statements and memoranda.
Investment advisers to pooled investment vehicles as well as advisers that are not required to be registered under the Advisers Act, are covered in this new rule as well. The SEC stated in the Release that “it is critical that we continue to be in a position to bring actions against unregistered advisers that manage pools and that defraud investors in those pools.”
Commercial Loans to 65% of Value
Post Settlement Funding
Lawsuit Funding asked:
If you are a plaintiff or attorney and you are seeking an advance against a case that has already reached a verdict you have more options. Post settlement lawsuit funding is a term that means a lawsuit cash advance after a case has reached a settlement. This means if you have won a personal injury or commercial litigation dispute and you are waiting for compensation, you can secure a cash advance while waiting for compensation.
Post settlement funding is typically used by plaintiffs and attorneys when compensation is not paid immediately. It is very common that when a lawsuit is settlement payment is not received immediately upon the verdict. In some cases compensation will be paid months after a case is won.
During the litigation process cases can take months or even years before a settlement is reached. For attorneys that take cases on a contingency fee basis oftentimes the defense will hold up these case intentionally in hopes of financially depleting the financial resources of the plaintiff in hopes for smaller settlements. Even when a verdict is won the defense can sometimes hold off payments or even appeal a case.
For some clients that have never been involved in a lawsuit, once they win a case they assume compensation is paid immediately. At LawLeaf we understand that when a lawsuit is won the plaintiff should receive compensation in a reasonable amount of time and although this is likely not the case, we can still help. Post settlement funding is used by plaintiffs that need money now. If you have recently won a settlement and searching for a lawsuit cash advance against future compensation, you still have options. You can seek a post settlement loan with a litigation finance company.
For additional information on post settlement funding visit LawLeaf today.
If you are a plaintiff or attorney and you are seeking an advance against a case that has already reached a verdict you have more options. Post settlement lawsuit funding is a term that means a lawsuit cash advance after a case has reached a settlement. This means if you have won a personal injury or commercial litigation dispute and you are waiting for compensation, you can secure a cash advance while waiting for compensation.
Post settlement funding is typically used by plaintiffs and attorneys when compensation is not paid immediately. It is very common that when a lawsuit is settlement payment is not received immediately upon the verdict. In some cases compensation will be paid months after a case is won.
During the litigation process cases can take months or even years before a settlement is reached. For attorneys that take cases on a contingency fee basis oftentimes the defense will hold up these case intentionally in hopes of financially depleting the financial resources of the plaintiff in hopes for smaller settlements. Even when a verdict is won the defense can sometimes hold off payments or even appeal a case.
For some clients that have never been involved in a lawsuit, once they win a case they assume compensation is paid immediately. At LawLeaf we understand that when a lawsuit is won the plaintiff should receive compensation in a reasonable amount of time and although this is likely not the case, we can still help. Post settlement funding is used by plaintiffs that need money now. If you have recently won a settlement and searching for a lawsuit cash advance against future compensation, you still have options. You can seek a post settlement loan with a litigation finance company.
For additional information on post settlement funding visit LawLeaf today.
Commercial Litigation Financing
Lawsuit Funding asked:
Commercial litigation funding has become popular within the legal finance industry. There are two variations of commercial litigation funding. The first is funding for the plainitiff & second is funding for the attorney. When a lawsuit funding company provides commercial litigation financing for a plaintiff they are providing funding as a pre settlement. In laymen terms this means before a case has reached a verdict.
This type of funding can be advanced to both an individual or company. For instance if a company is in a copyright infringement case they may secure funding to help pay for fees directly or indirectly related to the legal battle. Some companies will secure funding to help pay for business expenses such as salaries & insurance benefits. Surely each company may secure funding for different reasons however the way you secure funding is consistantly the same.
No different than a company an individual who is in a dispute may also be eligible to secure commerical litigation financing. When an individual secures financing for a commercial dispute they too can use the money however they deem fit. Using the same scenario an individual may have put up tens of thousands of dollars copyrighting a product only to find out a company or another individual is producing the product without consent. The company may or may not have profit from the item regardless they are still committed copyright infringement which can adversely effect the plaintiffs ability to profit from his product.
Attorney’s can also apply for lawsuit loans for commercial litigation cases. When an attorney secures financing they oftentimes need the money to help pay for costs directly associated with the case. For instance if an attorney is fighting a copyright infringment case against a large manufacture chances are the company has hired a team of defense attorney to handle the case. Oftentimes these companies have deep pockets and willing to spend as much money litigating the case as necessary. For smaller law firms this could mean the difference of winning full compensation or going broke trying to litigate a multi-million dollar case.
Regardless of the scenario when someone decides to secure commercial litigation financing they will do so through a lawsuit funding company. Lawsuit funding is much different than a bank. A bank would never loan money against a pending lawsuit nor would they loan money on a contingency fee basis. For most pre settlement cases the loan comes as non recourse meaning you only pay back the lender if you win the case.
At LawLeaf we understand that each case is different however the process of securing lawsuit funding is the same. When we receive an application for commercial litigation financing we will process each application the same. When a plaintiff or attorney applies for lawsuit funding through LawLeaf they can expect a fast approval process with a competitive bid. While not all cases qualify, we do our best in getting each client the funding they need. For additional information on LawLeaf please visit our website today.
Commercial litigation funding has become popular within the legal finance industry. There are two variations of commercial litigation funding. The first is funding for the plainitiff & second is funding for the attorney. When a lawsuit funding company provides commercial litigation financing for a plaintiff they are providing funding as a pre settlement. In laymen terms this means before a case has reached a verdict.
This type of funding can be advanced to both an individual or company. For instance if a company is in a copyright infringement case they may secure funding to help pay for fees directly or indirectly related to the legal battle. Some companies will secure funding to help pay for business expenses such as salaries & insurance benefits. Surely each company may secure funding for different reasons however the way you secure funding is consistantly the same.
No different than a company an individual who is in a dispute may also be eligible to secure commerical litigation financing. When an individual secures financing for a commercial dispute they too can use the money however they deem fit. Using the same scenario an individual may have put up tens of thousands of dollars copyrighting a product only to find out a company or another individual is producing the product without consent. The company may or may not have profit from the item regardless they are still committed copyright infringement which can adversely effect the plaintiffs ability to profit from his product.
Attorney’s can also apply for lawsuit loans for commercial litigation cases. When an attorney secures financing they oftentimes need the money to help pay for costs directly associated with the case. For instance if an attorney is fighting a copyright infringment case against a large manufacture chances are the company has hired a team of defense attorney to handle the case. Oftentimes these companies have deep pockets and willing to spend as much money litigating the case as necessary. For smaller law firms this could mean the difference of winning full compensation or going broke trying to litigate a multi-million dollar case.
Regardless of the scenario when someone decides to secure commercial litigation financing they will do so through a lawsuit funding company. Lawsuit funding is much different than a bank. A bank would never loan money against a pending lawsuit nor would they loan money on a contingency fee basis. For most pre settlement cases the loan comes as non recourse meaning you only pay back the lender if you win the case.
At LawLeaf we understand that each case is different however the process of securing lawsuit funding is the same. When we receive an application for commercial litigation financing we will process each application the same. When a plaintiff or attorney applies for lawsuit funding through LawLeaf they can expect a fast approval process with a competitive bid. While not all cases qualify, we do our best in getting each client the funding they need. For additional information on LawLeaf please visit our website today.
Pre Settlement Funding
Lawsuit Funding asked:
If you are a plaintiff in a personal injury or commercial litigation lawsuit you may be asking yourself how can I pull money out of my case before settlement. At LawLeaf we often hear from clients that are looking to secure pre settlement funding. Pre settlement lawsuit funding is a non recourse loan provider by a lender to a plaintiff with the understanding if their case settles they must pay back the advance with interest. Pre settlement funding is a way for a plaintiff to pull money out of their case before a case reaches a settlement.
When LawLeaf receives an application for pre settlement funding their main objective is to match their clients with the right lenders within their network. This process is a competitive bid process that can take less than a day for an approval for some clients.
Pre settlement funding can be used by an attorney to leverage a case and by a plaintiff to give the attorney more time to fight for fair and full compensation for their case. Too many times people decide to settle their case prematurely because they are in need of cash. Oftentimes these are the same people whom fully don’t understand that once a case has reached a settlement agreed upon both parties and compensation is paid, the plaintiff can no longer request additional monies from the defense. Plaintiffs whom are in financial trouble may take an early settlement to help pay for bills and other expenses without fully evaluating the value of their case. Your attorney should advise you of what should be fair and/or not fair.
Pre settlement funding can serve as a stop gap. There are too many insurance companies and other types of companies that have large defense teams with deep pockets. They will often delay or extend cases in hopes the plaintiff will settle for less money. This is a tactic that many companies will use when negotiating or going through the litigation process.
Even when a verdict is reached oftentimes the defense will appeal the case extending the amount of time for compensation payments. When a person is in need of money perhaps a premature settlement may look attractive. However with pre settlement funding you are able to extend the life of your case without having to settle for less money.
If you are currently searching for pre settlement lawsuit funding visit LawLeaf today. LawLeaf is a leading provider of lawsuit funding throughout North America. If you are interested in pre settlement funding apply online with LawLeaf today.
If you are a plaintiff in a personal injury or commercial litigation lawsuit you may be asking yourself how can I pull money out of my case before settlement. At LawLeaf we often hear from clients that are looking to secure pre settlement funding. Pre settlement lawsuit funding is a non recourse loan provider by a lender to a plaintiff with the understanding if their case settles they must pay back the advance with interest. Pre settlement funding is a way for a plaintiff to pull money out of their case before a case reaches a settlement.
When LawLeaf receives an application for pre settlement funding their main objective is to match their clients with the right lenders within their network. This process is a competitive bid process that can take less than a day for an approval for some clients.
Pre settlement funding can be used by an attorney to leverage a case and by a plaintiff to give the attorney more time to fight for fair and full compensation for their case. Too many times people decide to settle their case prematurely because they are in need of cash. Oftentimes these are the same people whom fully don’t understand that once a case has reached a settlement agreed upon both parties and compensation is paid, the plaintiff can no longer request additional monies from the defense. Plaintiffs whom are in financial trouble may take an early settlement to help pay for bills and other expenses without fully evaluating the value of their case. Your attorney should advise you of what should be fair and/or not fair.
Pre settlement funding can serve as a stop gap. There are too many insurance companies and other types of companies that have large defense teams with deep pockets. They will often delay or extend cases in hopes the plaintiff will settle for less money. This is a tactic that many companies will use when negotiating or going through the litigation process.
Even when a verdict is reached oftentimes the defense will appeal the case extending the amount of time for compensation payments. When a person is in need of money perhaps a premature settlement may look attractive. However with pre settlement funding you are able to extend the life of your case without having to settle for less money.
If you are currently searching for pre settlement lawsuit funding visit LawLeaf today. LawLeaf is a leading provider of lawsuit funding throughout North America. If you are interested in pre settlement funding apply online with LawLeaf today.