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

Mercer University - Walter F. George School of Law

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)

Mercer University - Walter F. George School of Law ( email )

1021 Georgia Ave
Macon, GA 31207-0001
United States

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
71
Abstract Views
467
rank
329,024
PlumX Metrics