The Texas Supreme Court Advisory Committee has posted an agenda for the meeting scheduled for this Friday, August 29, 2015. Third Party Litigation Funding is item VI on the agenda.
SCAC Meeting
9:00a, Friday, August 29, 2025
State Bar of Texas Building
1414 Colorado Street
Austin, TX 78701
TPLF Attachments to the Agenda appear following Tab VI on Page 113 of this document
The Supreme Court Advisory Committee (SCAC), first created in 1940 and periodically reconstituted since then, assists the Supreme Court in the continuing study, review, and development of rules of administration and procedure for Texas courts, taking into consideration the rules of other courts in the United States and proposals for changes from whatever source received. The Committee drafts rules as directed by the Court; solicits, summarizes, and reports to the Court the views of the bar and the public on court rules and procedures; and makes recommendations for change. Votes taken by the Committee are solely for informational purposes. The Committee’s discussions and recommendations are advisory and not binding on the Court.
Committee meetings are held after public notice and are open to the public. A record is made of all Committee proceedings. Committee expenses are paid from funds appropriated by the Legislature or provided by the State Bar of Texas.
Members of the Committee are appointed by the Supreme Court, which from time to time determines their number, qualifications, and terms of service. A Chair appointed by the Court to serve at its pleasure calls meetings with the approval of the Court, prepares an agenda in advance of each meeting, and presides over the meetings. Proposals, drafts, and other materials to be discussed are provided at or before meetings.
Members
The following persons are appointed by orders of the Court (Misc. Docket No. 23-9110 and Misc. Docket No. 25-9009), to serve as members of the Committee until December 31, 2026:
Hon. Bill Boyce, Houston
Hon. Harvey G. Brown, Houston
Hon. John Browning, Plano
Hon. Jerry Bullard, Grapevine
Professor Elaine A. G. Carlson, Houston
Jack P. Carroll, Beaumont
Hon. Tracy E. Christopher, Houston
Hon. Nicholas Chu, Austin
Alistair B. Dawson, Houston
Hon. Ana E. Estevez, Amarillo
Hon. David L. Evans, Fort Worth
L. Hayes Fuller III, Waco
Cynthia Barela Graham, Amarillo
Hon. Tom Gray, Waco
Marcy Hogan Greer, Austin
Rusty Hardin, Houston
Michael A. Hatchell, Austin
Lisa Bowlin Hobbs, Austin
Professor Lonny S. Hoffman, Houston
Roger W. Hughes, Harlingen
Lamont Jefferson, San Antonio
Hon. Peter Michael Kelly, Houston
Hon. David Keltner, Fort Worth
John H. Kim, Houston
Robert L. Levy, Houston
Hon. Emily Miskel, McKinney
Richard R. Orsinger, San Antonio
Giana Ortiz, Arlington
Jim M. Perdue, Jr., Houston
Constance H. Pfeiffer, Houston
Richard B. Phillips, Jr., Dallas
Christopher D. Porter, Houston
Thomas C. Riney, Amarillo
Eduardo R. Rodriguez, Brownsville
Hon. Maria Salas Mendoza, El Paso
Hon. Robert Schaffer, Houston
Pete Schenkkan, Austin
Quentin Smith, Houston
Macey Reasoner Stokes, Houston
Kent C. Sullivan, Austin
Hon. R. H. Wallace, Jr., Fort Worth
Charles R. Watson, Jr., Austin
Kennon Wooten, Austin
Emeritus Members
The following persons are appointed as emeritus members of the Committee:
Charles L. (Chip) Babcock IV
Professor William V. Dorsaneo III
Hon. Nathan L. Hecht
Gilbert I. (Buddy) Low
Ex Officio Members
The following persons are appointed ex officio members of the Committee, to serve at the pleasure of the Court:
a member of the Court of Criminal Appeals designated by that Court
the Chair of the State Bar of Texas Court Rules Committee
Hon. Sharena Gilliland of Weatherford
Hon. John F. Warren of Dallas
Chair & Vice Chair
Hon. Tracy E. Christopher is appointed chair of the Committee.
Marcy Hogan Greer is appointed vice-chair of the Committee.
SCAC Set to Take Up TPLF As Other States (Even New York and California!) Move to Regulate the Industry
Colorado, Georgia, Kansas, Oklahoma, Arizona, Montana, New York, California
by Aug 21, 2025
|We understand that the Texas Supreme Court Advisory Committee has placed proposed rule-making concerning third party litigation financing on its August 29 meeting agenda.
This is certainly timely, given that four states–Colorado, Georgia, Kansas, and Oklahoma–have already adopted rules this year. Additionally, Arizona and Montana have recently enacted statutory requirements prohibiting litigation funders from paying lawyers or health care providers commissions or referral fees (Arizona), prohibiting foreign entities from directly or indirectly from funding litigation (Arizona), mandating disclosure of TPLF agreements in all civil cases (Montana), making litigation funders jointly and severally liable for litigation expenses (Montana), and capping the amount funders can recover from a lawsuit at 25% (Montana). Legislation has also cleared the New York legislature that would require litigation funders to register with the state and establish contract and disclosure requirements. Even California is getting into the act. The California Assembly has unanimously approved legislation requiring litigation funders to be licensed and regulated by the state. You can read more about these developments in the article linked below.
We are pleased that the SCAC is taking up this issue, which clearly has become a serious matter of public policy across the country.
TPLF Rulemaking Updates
Montana, Arizona, New York, California, Colorado, Kansas, Georgia, Oklahoma
Landline Media | August 05, 2025 | Author: Keith Goble
https://landline.media/two-more-states-adopt-third-party-litigation-reform
TPLF Issue on August SCAC Agenda
TCJL Updates Rulemaking Request on Third Party Litigation Funding (TPLF)
H.R.1109 – Litigation Transparency Act of 2025, 119th Congress (2025-2026)
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/1109/text
US Chamber Coalition Letter on H.R. 1109
DOJ: US Law Firms Receiving TPLF from Foreign NGOs Must Register as Foreign Agents
On November 18, 2024, the Department of Justice’s Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA) Unit published a June 24, 2024 Advisory Opinion discussing whether a Foreign Non-Governmental Organization’s funding of U.S. litigation required the Law Firm representing a U.S. domestic NGO to register under FARA. As noted in an article authored by the US-based international law firm Morrison Foerster, in the opinion, the Unit concluded that a law firm that received funding from a foreign non-governmental organization (NGO) to pursue impact litigation in U.S. courts was required to register under FARA and was ineligible for both the legal and commercial exemptions.
Our thanks to ExxonMobil Executive Counsel and TCJL Board Member Robert Levy for bringing FARA’s opinion and Morrison Foerster’s article to our attention.
Third Party Funding of Patent Litigation
Korok Ray, Mays Business School, Texas A&M University
January 1, 2022
Supreme Court Advisory Committee
11-1-24 Agenda and Materials
Robert Levy Response to John Kim Opposition Memo
Opposition Memo by John Kim
WASHINGTON – Congressman Darrell Issa (CA-48), Chairman of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet, and Congressman Scott Fitzgerald (WI-05) introduced H.R. 9922, the Litigation Transparency Act of 2024, which requires the disclosure of parties receiving payment in civil lawsuits.
US Chamber Institute for Legal Reform
Grim Realities: Debunking Myths in Third-Party Litigation Funding
TCJL, US Chamber Institute for Legal Reform, Lawyers for Civil Justice Respond to Opposition
September 25, 2024
Opposition Files Letter with Supreme Court Advisory Committee (“ILFA” International Legal Finance Association)
August 30, 2024
This week, Chief Justice Nathan Hecht referred nine rule issues to the Supreme Court Advisory Committee (SCAC), including two items of particular interest to TCJL members. Consistent with SCAC’s rules and processes, the issues will be referred to a subcommittee for review and recommendation.
Third Party Litigation Funding (TPLF)
In response to TCJL’s request to the Texas Supreme Court, the Supreme Court Advisory Committee (SCAC) will be reviewing the matter of Third-Party Litigation Funding (TPLF). The request was sent from Chief Justice Nathan Hecht to SCAC’s Chairman Chip Babcock earlier today with the following instruction:
Third-Party Litigation Funding. The Court has received the attached correspondence regarding third-party litigation funding agreements. The Committee should review, advise whether the Court should adopt rules in connection with third-party litigation funding, and draft any recommended rules.
Artificial Intelligence (AI)
The TCJL Task Force on AI will follow this rule process closely, and TCJL will host a CLE on AI on November 7, 2024, in conjunction with our 38th Annual Meeting in Austin.
Artificial Intelligence. The State Bar of Texas’s Taskforce for Responsible AI in the Law has issued the attached interim report recommending potential changes to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 13 and Texas Rule of Evidence 901. The Committee should review, advise whether such amendments are necessary or desirable to account for artificial intelligence, and draft any recommended amendments.
The referral letter, including all nine issues and related attachments, appears below. Please stay tuned for updates and relevant TCJL meeting notices, and please contact our office if you would like to participate in the AI or TPLF workgroups. TCJL staff can be reached at info@tcjl.com or 512-320-0474.
SCAC Referral July 2024TCJL Provides TPLF History to Supreme Court Advisory Committee
May 20, 2024
In a letter to Chief Justice Hecht earlier this week, TCJL requested that rulemaking be initiated to require some form of disclosure of the existence of third-party litigation funding agreements to the court and parties under appropriate circumstances. Our letter asks the Chief Justice to refer the issue to the Supreme Court Advisory Committee for study and the promulgation of a proposed rule to the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.
Though rulemaking through the SCAC can be a protracted process, it would put the very real and substantive ethical issues posed by TPLF before sitting judges, representatives of both sides of the trial bar, the State Bar of Texas, and in-house and external corporate counsel. If the Court refers our request, we can expect a robust and perhaps contentious debate over these issues and the extent to which TPLF agreements should be discoverable in a particular case and by whom. Our request makes no distinction between consumer and commercial litigation financing for the simple reason that the ethical considerations are the same.
You can read the letter below.