Here's a great example of a case where it takes over 2 years for a settlement to be reached and pre-settlement legal funding can be a valuable asset for the plaintiff and their attorney.

Substantial medical bills need to be paid and often plaintiffs are forced to settle for a fraction of the justified amount by well-funded corporate or government legal teams in order to get needed cash now. Legal funding can supply needed cash today and give the plaintiff and their attorney the time needed to earn a full and fair settlement of the case. Here's the scoop:

In June of 2008, a felon under the supervision and control of the Washington Dept. of Corrections struck a pedestrian in a crosswalk while driving. The victim was in the hospital for six months and suffered traumatic brain injuries. She continues under care today.

The driver fled the scene in the stolen car she was driving.  The lawsuit claimed the driver was under supervision because:

A spokesperson for the DOC denied that the supervision was mishandled. They agreed to the settlement for fear of a sympathetic jury awarding an even higher amount.

A Florida Court of Appeals has upheld a $65 million verdict resulting from a 2007 automobile crash. The victim was driving her car when a truck driven by an employee of Bynum Transport Inc., made a left turn into the driver’s side of the victim’s car.

The victim received severe injuries and, even with long-term therapy, is unlikely to make a complete recovery. She requires 24/7 care and needs assistance with all of the basic activities of life.

It took three years for the victim in this case to finally settle in a robustly defended action. During this time, the victim accrued major medical bills and was unable to work.

This is a perfect example of what lawsuit funding can do for the plaintiff. During the three years of litigation, pre-settlement legal funding can provide the victim the cash needed to pay for medical and living expenses. Without this advance legal funding, the victim likely would have to settle for a fraction of the amount just to get needed cash to pay bills.

As is often the case with lawsuit funding, the higher case settlement provides both the victim and the attorney with greater cash settlements than would be achieved without the pre-settlement funding.

Mary S. Phillips, formerly a softball coach for Acton-Boxborough Regional High, isn’t giving up. In 2007, the school failed to renew her contract. Phillips believes the reasons were obvious: she is female and a lesbian. She has brought a complaint to the Middlesex Superior Court alleging job-discrimination. This case is an excellent example of how lawsuit funding can level the playing field for a plaintiff suing defendants with deep pockets.

Phillips, who was hired as an assistant coach in 2003, was open about her sexuality. With her partner she is raising five children, three of whom were students at Acton-Boxborough. In 2004 she was promoted to head coach of the softball team. Phillips believes that her recent dismissal is an indication of the school stance on not only her sexuality but also her gender.

The school sites hostile behavior, parental complaints and swearing among the reasons her contract was not renewed. Parents of some of the athletes under Phillips guidance have complained about her abilities as a coach. They cited lack of playing time and a poor win/loss record. Phillips later discussed these issues with the Acton-Boxborough athletic director, Steve Desy, claiming they were unfounded.

According to the suit brought by Phillips, she was praised for her performance during the 2007 season by Desy, stating he told her she has done ‘a great job.’

Shortly after the end of the 2007 school year, several parents brought new complaints to the school district. Notis notes that these complaints are not described in the lawsuit nor has he received official copies of the complaints. The lawsuit asserts that when questioned, Desy would not provide further details to Phillips regarding the complaints.

Phillips further alleges that, while discussing the new complaints, she was asked by Desy if she wished to keep her job. Apparently referencing her desire to have another child, Desy allegedly asserted that her ‘young family’ and desire to ‘get younger’ might be more important to Phillips than her job.

The lawsuit, brought by Notis on Phillips behalf, alleges gender discrimination as well. It details several cases where male colleagues in similar situations were not disciplined or not treated as harshly as Phillips, citing several cases in which complaints that male coaches swore or were abusive were left unanswered. Another male heterosexual coach was sent to anger management classes after losing his temper. He did not lose his job.

Phillips filed a suit with the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination soon after her contract was not renewed. The commission found her claims baseless and cited several meetings between athletic director Desy and the softball team or their parents. Many of the team members expressed dissatisfaction with their experiences with Coach Phillips, specifically citing her use of foul language. As many as eight parents expressed plans to remove their daughters from the team if Phillips returned for the 2008 season.

The MCAD also notes a conversation between Desy and Phillips during which the athletic director brought forth examples of complaints and attempted to discuss changing the behavior. Desy cites the reason her contract was not renewed was her failure to work towards addressing the complaints and concerns made by both parents and students.

The state commission went on to note that Phillips sexuality was known, even before she received her job.

The school district stands behind the decision, stating that the do not tolerate ‘bad’ behavior from their coaches or staff. Superintendent Steven Mills couldn’t comment on the case, other to say it was without merit.

Phillips remains strong in her belief that she was fired because of her sexuality and not because of poor performance or questionable behavior. Her attorney, Notis, states that athletic director Desy appeared to radically change his position in regards to Phillips stating that the allegations brought against his client were categorically false.

This case is likely to spend many months or years in court proceedings before a settlement is reached. The plaintiff is without a job and financial resources during this time, so pre-settlement lawsuit funding can provide the cash needed by the plaintiff to give her the time needed to achieve a full and fair settlement.

Racial and religious discrimination are, unfortunately, still very real problems within the workplace. Winning a lawsuit for this type of discrimination can be a lengthy process, which makes it an ideal candidate for lawsuit funding

Recently a Texas jury awarded a Dallas AIDS clinic doctor, Naiel Nassar, $3.6 million for racial and religious discrimination. The plaintiff's team claimed he was retaliated against for refusing to commit fraud in his billing. Nassar further claimed that his employer showed strong evidence of racial and religious discrimination.

The issue began when Nassar, whose salary was paid for by a federal grant was asked by his employer, Beth Levine, to bill an insurer for his work with patients. This would constitute billing fraud, as it would result in receiving pay for work which has already been covered.

This incident was escalated when Levine indicated to Nassar that she held an opinion that Middle Eastern employees were lazy. She even went so far as to discuss his performance with his supervisor, asking if he was working, and whether or not he was billing for services. This was a direct conflict with Nassar's work history, which showed that he saw more patients than his co-workers, and had a larger workload.

Further discrimination claims arose when a Pakistani Muslim was recommended for Nassar's job after he vacated the position. Levine offered a very low salary not in line with the requisite experience, and in the end, decided to hire a Caucasian doctor with less experience. The Caucasian doctor was offered more money for the position.

Levine claimed to be stunned by the accusations, and went on to refute that she had never discriminated, or made disparaging remarks based upon country of origin or religion.

After his work environment made him so uncomfortable he felt he had to leave, Nassar tried to get a job with Parkland Hospital in 2006. Parkland agreed to hire him, and was making preparations for just that, when his former employer claimed that an agreement that guaranteed all Physician services at their facility would prevent this. Nassar's job offer letter was never signed, or sent. Ultimately, Nasser won his case settlement in court.

If you, or someone you know is planning to file a lawsuit for discrimination in the workplace, it's important to be prepared for a lengthy court battle. Much of the jury's decision will rely upon evidence that may or may not be well documented. During the court proceedings, it's possible to take out a litigation funding advance, often called a 'legal cash advance'. This payment can provide income, especially if you are unemployed due to discrimination. It's also important to note that legal funding does not need to be repaid if you do not win your case, and there are legal restrictions that put a cap on what legal funding companies are able to take as a percentage of the settlement.

Twenty six years after many babies were killed or injured by a product called E-Ferol, a federal judge has approved a $110 million dollar settlement against the product’s maker and marketer. The E-Ferol case is a classic example of the wheels of justice turning very slowly for victims of unscrupulous product marketing. The families of the babies killed in this case, and the surviving babies who had lingering illnesses and medical costs, had to wait almost three decades for a court to rule in their favor.

These families could have benefited from private lawsuit funding to help them with their legal and medical bills while this case was working its way through the courts. Very few individuals can afford the costs of a protracted court case like this. With private financial help that does not have to be repaid unless and until the case is settled, they can pursue justice to its rightful conclusion.

E-Ferol was an IV-delivered vitamin E supplement designed to help prevent blindness in premature babies. It was marketed to doctors and hospitals in 1983 and 1984 without FDA review or approval. Within four months of its introduction, several dozen babies who had been given E-Ferol died and many more suffered kidney and liver complications.

After an investigation by the Food and Drug Administration the product was removed from the market in April of 1984. In subsequent criminal proceedings three officers of the companies that manufactured and distributed E-Ferol were sentenced to six months in prison. The civil class action lawsuit filed on behalf of the victims and their families has taken almost three decades to be resolved.

Families of E-Ferol victims could have soughtlitigation funding to help them with their long legal battle. Remaining victims of this product who have not yet been identified, or their surviving relatives, could also benefit from learning about pre-settlement funding.

At least thirty eight babies died from E-Ferol, but many of the victims’ families did not know for years what had caused their deaths. Keegan McDaniel died in a Dallas hospital in 1984, thirteen days after he was born. His mother, Cynthia McDaniel, did not learn until 2006, when she was contacted by a law firm, that E-Ferol was implicated in her son’s death. Like many parents and doctors, since E-Ferol was considered a vitamin supplement, she assumed it was safe.

Lawyers for Carter-Glogau Laboratories and O'Neal, Jones & Feldman Pharmaceuticals, E-Ferol’s manufacturer and distributor, respectively, contend that vitamin supplements were not closely regulated in the 1980s and that damages caused by the product were inadvertent, unforeseeable, and not the result of any fraud or deception on the part of their clients.

Art Brender, one of the lawyers representing the plaintiffs in the class action suit, contends that the companies involved in the sale of E-Ferol lied to doctors and hospitals. He believes that many more deaths may have been caused by the product than have been specifically attributed to its use. Some hospitals have been unwilling to release information on the use of E-Ferol, since they claim patient privacy issues are involved, while others have cooperated fully in the case.

Given the complexities of a situation like the E-Ferol case, the process of assuring civil justice to the victims is long and incredibly expensive. In order for families injured in a similar situation to be able to survive while the lawsuit is moving through the system, they can turn to a private lawsuit loan to help them with medical bills, legal costs and living expenses until the case is settled.

Wrongful arrest is one of the most frightening and embarrassing situations anyone can experience. There are also good reasons wrongful arrest cases are good candidates for lawsuit funding.

Wrongful arrest puts a person in a position of intense emotional strain. It also can seriously harm a person's finances, or even cause them to lose a job. The ramifications of wrongful arrest can last many years or even a lifetime. These are difficult cases to try and typically take many months or years to come to trial or reach settlements.

Many victims of wrongful arrest simply aren't aware that legal funding is available to them to provide the financial resources needed to receive a full and fair judgment in a lengthy lawsuit. If the victim loses a job, the financial stress can cause them to settle the case prematurely for an inferior case settlement amount. Legal advance funcing for wrongful arrest cases help prevent that outcome.

Consider the plight of a woman in Houston, TX, who was arrested because two Wal-Mart employees accused her of using counterfeit money orders to exchange for cash. They also said they planned to file shoplifting charges if she didn't pay $200 for merchandise.  It was only after two days in jail that it was proven that the money orders used by Nitra Gipson were completely genuine.

She decided to sue Wal-Mart, and the jury could clearly see that she was a victim of defamation as the result of these accusations. The court awarded her $8.2 million. Nitra was lucky, however. If she hadn't had funds to cover her case, she likely would have settled for a much smaller amount while the case continued. That's why legal funding is so important in cases like these. It allows claimants to pursue their case and reach the best possible outcome.

And Nitra’s case is certainly not an isolated incident. In 2009, Carlos Miller was arrested for photographing the trains of the NY subways, despite the fact that he worked for the Transport Authority, and even showed officers the rules and regulations about photographing trains on his cell phone. They refused to hear of it, and promptly accused him of "disobeying a lawful order" and making "unreasonable noise."

Mr. Miller was able to win a judgment of $30,000 because of this treatment, and said he planned to use the money to put a down payment down on a house. It's important to understand how cases like this can be fought and won, because wrongful arrest is such a serious issue. A legal cash advance can help many people in his situation pursue a case, and the money does not need to be repaid unless the plaintiff wins.

In Seattle, Romelle Bradford suffered more than just embarrassment, and the unfortunate pain of having to answer "yes" every time a potential employer asks if he's ever been arrested. He was also seriously injured during his arrest for obstruction, and resisting arrest. He won $268,000, and because the arrest was a civil rights violation, the city will have to pay for his legal fees.

Wrongful arrests like these can have lifelong repercussions. They may affect the victim's ability to get a job, and may cause psychological issues for many years. That's why it's so important to seek compensation if you've become the victim of an unlawful arrest. Lawsuit funding for wrongful death cases can help victims receive the full and fair settlement to which they are entitled.

Three more were recently added to the lawsuit after a petition in the last few weeks. This brings the current total number of plaintiffs to 79. These women claim that the staff at Bloomberg L.P. were discriminated against for using their well earned, and much needed maternity leave. The discrimination took place in the form of pay cuts and demotions directed at only those women who used maternity leave after becoming pregnant.

Bloomberg's lawyers seemed intent on fighting the case out to the end, and were not interested in settling the case unless it was dropped. This may place an incredible hardship on these new mothers, who must now fight out a court case that likely won't even begin until next year.

ATVs, or all-terrain vehicles, are a growing cause of death in both children and adults. These recreational vehicles are primarily used for riding off road. They're also used in the agriculture and ranching industry to cross wide tracts of land quickly. ATVs are available in several sizes, but some can be as heavy as a quarter ton, and may have a 250 CC or higher engine. Because these vehicles are driven off road, where license regulations for engine size are not enforced, children are often drivers of these heavy vehicles. Many who have filed suit for an ATV injury have had to seek out a personal injury lawsuit loan to earn a fair settlement on their case.

Because the numbers of deaths and injury related to driving and riding ATVs has risen dramatically, law enforcement agencies are seeking ways to better regulate ATV use, especially among children. Though the helmet law is already in effect, new laws, like stricter licensing are on the table.

Because the ATV is a recreational vehicle, they are very attractive to children. Parents often have the mistaken notion that an ATV is safer than a motorcycle, because it has more wheels, and is lower to the ground. They do not take into account the speed at which these vehicles can travel. Collisions can be deadly, and a bump in the terrain can throw riders off. These vehicles are also hard for inexperienced drivers like children to control, and they may inadvertently hit another person, or stationary item. Many personal injury lawsuits have arisen from ATV accidents, with many of the victims needing legal advance funding to pursue the case to a successful conclusion.

The most common victims of ATV death or accidents are riders under the age of 15 who do not have adult supervision. Most of the ATVs are 90cc or more, which can easily exceed speeds of 55mph. The majority of accidents are caused by drivers hitting others, or by being thrown from the vehicle. Families of those who have been killed, or those who have been injured by reckless ATV use, often do not realize that litigation financing is available as their case is proceeding.

The results of an accident can be severe. A large majority of ATV accidents (75%) result in spinal cord and head injuries, which are some of the most severe in terms of long-lasting damage and potential death. Preventative measures for those using ATVs should include wearing helmets and protective gear, taking classes on handling these vehicles, and observing safe driving practices. Children under 18 should always be supervised when driving or riding an ATV.

If you or a loved one has been injured as a result of reckless ATV use, be sure to look to plaintiff financing to help cover medical bills and expenses. This will allow you to bring the lawsuit to completion, without taking an early settlement just to finish up the proceedings.

The last thing JoAnna, a 45 year old mother of two in Texas, expected when she got in her car to drive home from a friend's house was a collision that would leave her unable to work for over six months, and the driver of the other car dead at the scene.

JoAnna, who made a statement for police in the emergency room, after being treated for multiple fractures, a concussion, and a broken leg, told authorities that the other car swerved into her lane from the northbound side of traffic, causing a head on collision that was fatal for the other driver, another woman aged 28. JoAnna had no idea what might have made the other driver swerve into opposing traffic. It may have been intoxication, lack of attention, or she may have fallen asleep at the wheel.

When JoAnna was told that she would not be able to work for six to eight months following the collision, she sought and found the services of a personal injury attorney who could help her win her case. With two children in school, and massive medical bills, however, there was no way for JoAnna to afford the services of a personal injury lawyer without litigation funding.  She needed a steady source of income while she worked with her lawyer to reach a final settlement. Luckily, she was able to find an excellent legal financing company that could help her pay for medical and living expenses during her lawsuit.

Joanna's case is quite common. Perusing litigation for personal injury can be prohibitively expensive, especially if the case isn't won successfully.  Many who have been injured by others use a lawsuit advance, or pre-settlement advance as a way to cover bills while their case is being presented.

Legal cash advances are a valuable resource for those in litigation for personal injury. Because these pre-settlement advances do not have to be paid back if the case is lost, there is no risk to the injured person working their way through the court system. In addition, legal funding is able to provide assistance, but cannot take a large portion of the money awarded in a settlement.

What legal financing offers is the freedom from pressure to settle early that cash strapped litigants often face. In order to complete the trial and get back to work to pay bills, many in personal injury lawsuits will agree to a settlement much lower than they would get had they pursued the case. If you've been injured, and are seeking compensation for your injury, contact a litigation funding expert, who can explain their policies in detail. They will work closely with you to ensure that you are protected while you fight for your  legal compensation.

At P & T Financial, we've made the lawsuit funding application process fast and easy, and we provide lawsuit funding for many different types of lawsuits.