![]() ![]() The companies resolved the fight with Sysco agreeing to assign Burford its legal claims against the food suppliers, substituting a Burford entity as the plaintiff in the price-fixing lawsuits. Sysco sued Burford in March, accusing the funder of meddling in the price-fixing suits, interfering with Sysco’s trial counsel, and blocking a settlement Burford deemed “too low.”īurford said Sysco gave it veto authority over the settlement talks-power that Burford says it normally doesn’t have-after Sysco violated the terms of the funding agreement. It also highlighted concerns that funders are actually calling the shots on how those cases are handled. The fight offered a peek inside the shadowy world of litigation funding, a $13.5 billion industry in which outside investors pool money to bet on lawsuits. “This case got all the attention that it got because it’s an opportunity for people to hate on legal finance.” ![]() ![]() “Everybody wins,” said Tom Baker, law professor at University of Pennsylvania. Burford is taking full control of price-fixing lawsuits it funded for Sysco, which gets Sysco out of messy legal fights with its suppliers. The companies told a court last week that they squashed their dispute. and litigation funder Burford Capital over a $140 million deal appears to have ended with both sides getting what they wanted. The public fight between food giant Sysco Corp. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |