Having just posted on litigation funding, we got an email the very next day:

Hi there,

I discovered your practice through the mentioned matter and believe we are well-aligned to help one another moving forward.

For context, I represent XXXXXXXXX, a litigation funder. We invest in commercial cases that are historically too small (values of $1M to $10M), which in turn has created a new resource for savvy firms.
Attorneys often approach us when their clients are in need of capital — either to cover their fees, out-of-pocket costs like experts, or whatever necessary to either take the case or keep it in-tact.
Please let me know if you’re interested in learning more about receiving capital for a current or future case or have any questions about litigation finance. 
I look forward to hearing from you.

One odd thing about this “cold-call” solicitation was that it came under a subject line which had the name of a past LEVENTHAL pllc client whose case settled and dismissed a year ago (the so-called “mentioned matter’). But the so-called “mentioned matter” was a client’s very private and personal matter which we have never mentioned (outside of the lawsuit itself).

Do we conclude that the email was bot-drafted arbitrary mash-up of the recent blog post and some other web-accessible data about a LEVENTHAL pllc case? Coincidence?

We also note that $1M-$10M cases were apparently “historically too small” for litigation funding. Query whether “scalability,” a buzzword du jour, could mean an expansion of litigation funding to so-called small cases? (Most LEVENTHAL pllc clients would be stunned to learn that a $500,000 lawsuit is thought of as “a small lawsuit.”)

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *