Clarifying the 'Probate Lending' Debate: A Response to Professors Horton and Chandrasekher
16 Pages
Posted: 18 Nov 2016
Last revised: 10 Mar 2017
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:
Suggested Citation
Kidd, Jeremy, Clarifying the 'Probate Lending' Debate: A Response to Professors Horton and Chandrasekher (November 16, 2016). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2870615
