Consumer litigation funding law varies sharply by state, and it is changing fast — several of the statutes below were enacted or amended in 2023–2026. This is legal information, not legal advice, and is not exhaustive. Entries marked Unverified could not be fully confirmed against a primary source and should be independently checked before being relied on.
State
Statute
Cap / Limitation
Citation
AlaskaUnverified
No dedicated statute
No statutory cap identified. Alaska has no dedicated consumer litigation funding statute; courts have not applied common-law champerty doctrine to invalidate non-recourse funding agreements.
No Alaska statute identified — common law governs
Arizona
Yes
No statutory rate or fee cap. Arizona regulates litigation financing through mandatory disclosure and conduct rules, not a price ceiling.
California
Yes
No percentage or APR cap. Charges must follow a predetermined, time-based schedule rather than a percentage of recovery, compounding interest is banned, and charge accrual is capped at 36 months from funding.
ColoradoUnverified
Yes
Funding fee may not exceed 36% of the funded amount, and the consumer's repayment amount must be a predetermined fixed sum rather than a percentage of the judgment or settlement. Companies must register with the Colorado Attorney General.
ConnecticutUnverified
Yes
Connecticut has no dedicated litigation funding act. Per Department of Banking guidance, a litigation funding advance with an effective APR above 12% (on amounts up to $50,000) requires a Small Loan Act license. The exact rate ceiling that applies once licensed was not confirmed against primary statutory text.
Delaware
No dedicated statute
No statutory cap. Delaware has no dedicated consumer litigation funding statute.
Florida
No dedicated statute
No statutory cap. Florida has no enacted consumer litigation funding statute — two bills (2024 and 2026) both died before passage.
Georgia
Yes
No fixed percentage or APR cap. A financier's recovery is limited to a "proportional share" of proceeds rather than a numeric ceiling; financings of $25,000 or more can trigger joint-and-several liability for frivolous-litigation sanctions.
HawaiiUnverified
No dedicated statute
No statutory cap identified. Hawaii has no dedicated consumer litigation funding statute.
No Hawaii statute identified — common law governs
IdahoUnverified
No dedicated statute
No statutory cap specific to litigation funding identified.
No Idaho litigation-funding statute identified — common law governs
Illinois
Yes
Fee capped at 18% of the funded amount per 6-month period, plus a one-time document preparation fee of no more than $75. No charges may accrue beyond 42 months from the funding date. The amount owed must be a predetermined, time-based sum — never a percentage of the recovery.
Indiana
Yes
Servicing charge capped at an annual rate of 36% of the funded amount, earned at consummation and annually thereafter. A separate document/preparation charge is capped at $500 per proceeding.
Iowa
Yes
No statutory fee cap. The amount owed must be a predetermined, time-based sum rather than a percentage of recovery, but no maximum rate is set.
KansasUnverified
Yes
No statutory fee cap. The amount owed must be a predetermined, time-based sum rather than a percentage of recovery.
Maine
Yes
No statutory percentage cap. Fees may not be assessed beyond 42 months from the contract date, and compounding is limited to semiannual — but no maximum annual fee percentage is set.
Massachusetts
No dedicated statute
No statutory cap. Massachusetts has no enacted consumer litigation funding statute; a pending bill (S.680) would create a 36% annual charge cap, but it has not passed.
Michigan
No dedicated statute
No statutory cap. Michigan has no enacted consumer litigation funding statute; a bill (HB 5281) passed the House in 2026 but has not been signed into law.
Missouri
Yes
No statutory fee, rate, or percentage cap. Missouri treats the transaction as a non-recourse sale of a consumer asset and regulates disclosure and licensing rather than price.
Montana
Yes
A financier may not receive more than 25% of the amount of any judgment, award, settlement, or verdict obtained — and separately, the interest rate charged may not exceed Montana's general usury rate.
Nevada
Yes
Annual charge rate capped at 40% of the funded amount; the amount owed may not be calculated as a percentage of the recovery. A one-time document-preparation fee is capped at $500, and total funding per legal claim is capped at $500,000.
New Hampshire
No dedicated statute
No statutory cap. New Hampshire has no enacted consumer litigation funding statute — a 2025 bill (HB 733) died in committee.
New Jersey
No dedicated statute
No statutory cap. New Jersey has no enacted consumer litigation funding statute despite over a decade of proposed bills — the most recent (A1931/S1475) was marked dead as of January 2026.
New Mexico
No dedicated statute
No statutory cap. New Mexico has no dedicated consumer litigation funding act; the state's general Small Loan Act governs "loans," and litigation funding is structured as a non-recourse purchase of contingent proceeds rather than a loan, placing it outside that Act.
New York
Yes
Charges to the consumer litigation funding company are capped at 25% of the gross amount recovered on the claim — disclosed verbatim, in 12-pt bold, in the funding contract.
North DakotaUnverified
No dedicated statute
No statutory cap identified. North Dakota has no dedicated consumer litigation funding statute.
No North Dakota statute identified — common law governs
OhioUnverified
Yes
Current law imposes no fixed rate cap — only an APR-style disclosure recalculated every 6 months. A new law (H.B. 105) takes effect October 6, 2026 and splits Ohio's framework into consumer and commercial litigation funding agreements; secondary sources describe new fee caps under the incoming law, but the exact figures could not be independently confirmed against the enacted statutory text.
Oklahoma
Yes
No statutory rate or fee cap. Oklahoma regulates consumer litigation funding through licensing and bonding rather than a price ceiling.
Oregon
No dedicated statute
No statutory cap. Oregon has no dedicated consumer litigation funding statute; its general consumer finance chapter (ORS Ch. 725) and usury statute do not address litigation funding.
PennsylvaniaUnverified
No dedicated statute
No statutory cap identified. Pennsylvania has no statute specific to consumer litigation funding.
No Pennsylvania statute identified — common law governs
Rhode IslandUnverified
No dedicated statute
Unresolved: Rhode Island has no confirmed dedicated consumer litigation funding statute. Some industry sources claim a 2015 bill brought lawsuit advances under the state's general usury law, but this could not be verified against primary statutory text. A 2026 regulatory bill (S. 2494) is pending, not enacted.
South DakotaUnverified
No dedicated statute
No statutory cap identified. South Dakota has no dedicated consumer litigation funding statute.
No South Dakota statute identified — common law governs
Tennessee
Yes
A litigation financier may charge a consumer an annual fee of no more than 10% of the original amount provided — structured as a maximum yearly fee of $360 per $1,000 provided — for up to 3 years, charged only once per year per claim regardless of the number of transactions on that claim.
Texas
No dedicated statute
No statutory cap. Texas has no enacted consumer litigation funding statute — a 2015 bill (H.B. 3454) died in committee and was never revived. Texas courts have instead addressed non-recourse funding through case law treating it as distinct from a "loan" under usury law.
Utah
Yes
No statutory rate or fee cap. Utah regulates consumer litigation funding through registration and disclosure, not a price ceiling.
Vermont
Yes
No statutory cap. Vermont requires disclosure of the annual percentage rate and charges but sets no maximum.
VirginiaUnverified
No dedicated statute
No statutory cap identified. Virginia has no statute specific to consumer litigation funding.
No Virginia statute identified — common law and general usury principles govern
Washington
No dedicated statute
No statutory cap. Washington has no enacted consumer litigation funding statute — a pending bill (HB 2255) would require disclosure only, with no rate cap, but has not passed as of this table's research date.
Washington DC
No dedicated statute
No statutory cap. The District of Columbia has no code provision specific to consumer litigation funding.
Wisconsin
Yes
No fee or rate cap. Wisconsin was the first state (2018) to require automatic disclosure of litigation funding agreements in a lawsuit's discovery — but this runs to the court and opposing parties in the litigation, not to the funded consumer through the funding contract itself.
WyomingUnverified
No dedicated statute
No statutory cap identified. Wyoming has no statute specific to consumer litigation funding, and no pending bill was found.
No Wyoming statute identified — common law governs
