Clarifying the 'Probate Lending' Debate: A Response to Professors Horton and Chandrasekher

93 Notre Dame Law Review Online 149 (2018).

10 Pages Posted: 18 Nov 2016 Last revised: 8 Jan 2019

See all articles by Jeremy Kidd

Jeremy Kidd

Drake University - Law School

Date Written: November 16, 2016

Abstract

Professors Horton and Chandrasekher break new ground in the legal funding debate with their article on probate funding. Unfortunately, that ground is shaky, based on false assumptions and flawed statistical methodologies. The methodological cracks in the foundation, including unwarranted extrapolation from a limited sample and claiming to measure ex ante risk from ex post results, are identified.

Keywords: litigation financing, litigation funding, litigation lending, third-party litigation financing, champerty, probate, usury, truth in lending

JEL Classification: D01, D81, K39

Suggested Citation

Kidd, Jeremy, Clarifying the 'Probate Lending' Debate: A Response to Professors Horton and Chandrasekher (November 16, 2016). 93 Notre Dame Law Review Online 149 (2018)., Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2870615 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2870615

Jeremy Kidd (Contact Author)

Drake University - Law School ( email )

27th & Carpenter Sts.
Des Moines, IA 50311
United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
80
Abstract Views
785
rank
415,285
PlumX Metrics