Courts and Civil Law
Ohio consumers could see full costs in lawsuit cash deals
The proposal requires a written contract with plain disclosures and a short cancellation window. It also keeps nonprofit legal aid groups outside the new commercial rules.
For Ohioans waiting on a settlement, lawsuit funding can come with a lot of hidden cost. This bill says those deals must show the full price upfront, give consumers a chance to cancel, and leave pro bono nonprofits out of the financing label.
- Charges would include interest and several kinds of fees, not just the headline rate.
- Advertising would cover phone messages, radio, TV, internet and other media.
- Nonprofit groups doing pro bono work would be left out.
- The bill also defines commercial litigation financiers in state law.
- For Ohioans waiting on money from a lawsuit, the terms of a funding deal can decide how much of a settlement or judgment is left at the end
For Ohioans waiting on money from a lawsuit, the terms of a funding deal can decide how much of a settlement or judgment is left at the end. A proposal in Columbus would bring those non-recourse litigation funding agreements into state law under a clearer consumer legal funding framework, with definitions aimed at the parts of the contract that do the most work.
The bill would also reach the business side of case financing. It spells out who counts as a commercial litigation financier, including people in the business of making agreements tied to civil claims with claimants or with the lawyers and law firms representing them.
The fees behind the label
The sharpest language in the bill is about money. It would define “charges” as any amount paid to the funding company above the funded amount, including interest and all administrative, origination, underwriting and other fees, no matter what a company calls them. That matters because a deal advertised one way can look very different once the extras are added up.
Advertising gets a broad definition too. Written, oral, electronic and printed messages would all count, including recorded telephone messages and broadcasts on radio, television and the internet, if they are meant to induce a consumer into a funding agreement. The proposal would also bar false or misleading advertising.
A line around nonprofits
The bill does not treat every source of legal help the same way. It would exclude nonprofit organizations that are tax exempt and represent claimants on a pro bono basis. It also says that simply seeking or accepting a settlement or judgment that includes costs or attorney’s fees does not, by itself, turn those groups or their contract lawyers into commercial litigation financiers.
That carveout matters because the proposal is not trying to erase litigation funding. It is trying to separate consumer cash-for-claim deals from nonprofit legal aid and from the broader market for commercial case financing, where the money, the fees and the advertising all come under a brighter light.