When a client asks whether litigation funding can help with case expenses, the first question is when the money is needed. Post settlement funding companies provide an advance after a settlement or award has been reached, not financing for expenses incurred while a case is still being litigated. Attorneys can prevent confusion by identifying the funding type, reviewing the agreement, and explaining what repayment may mean for the client’s net recovery.

Discuss a funding question with our team

Can post-settlement funding pay case expenses?

Usually, it is important to separate three situations that people may all call “litigation funding.” A plaintiff may need support for personal bills while a case is unresolved; a law firm may be considering how to cover litigation costs; or a client may need access to part of an agreed recovery before the funds are disbursed. These needs occur at different points and involve different arrangements.

Post-settlement funding refers to an advance made after a settlement or award, while payment, release, lien resolution, or other distribution steps are still pending. It may help a plaintiff address an immediate personal cash need during that interval. It cannot ordinarily solve an expense problem that arose earlier in the case, because the settlement event has not yet occurred. A reader asking about help with case expenses should therefore clarify whether the expenses are the client’s living costs or costs of investigating and litigating the claim.

Pre-settlement funding is a separate type of plaintiff advance. It may be considered while a claim is pending, subject to the provider’s review and the terms of the agreement. It is not the same as a law firm’s case-cost financing, and an attorney should not assume a consumer advance is intended or permitted to pay litigation expenses. For a plain-language overview of plaintiff funding options, confirm the particular product and timing with the provider.

That distinction is especially useful when a client uses “case expenses” broadly. Ask what bill is due, who owes it, when it is payable, and whether the client is asking for personal financial support or financing for the claim itself. The answer should shape the next conversation, not a general label.

How do the timing and purpose differ?

The stage of the claim is a practical first screen. Before resolution, the amount and timing of any recovery remain uncertain. After agreement or award, the result is known, but disbursement may still take time. The agreement should say when an advance is available and how repayment is calculated through that period.

This comparison is a starting point, not a substitute for reading the agreement. A client’s situation may not fit neatly into one description. If the client has a settlement but funds are not yet available, a post-settlement option may be relevant; if there is no resolution, it is not. If the law firm is seeking funds to pay litigation costs, evaluate that as a firm-level arrangement rather than presenting a consumer advance as the answer.

Consider a client who asks for money to cover household bills before a mediation. A post-settlement advance would not answer that immediate timing need because no settlement has yet been reached. A pre-settlement plaintiff advance could be a separate option to review, if available and appropriate, but it is not automatically a loan for the firm’s expenses or a replacement for counsel’s case-cost decisions. By contrast, if a settlement has been signed and the client is waiting for distribution, the timing may fit the post-settlement category. That does not establish eligibility, guarantee funds, or determine whether the cost is reasonable; those questions still require review.

Attorneys can also prevent terminology from obscuring the source of an obligation. An expert invoice, filing cost, or other litigation expense may be paid or advanced under a firm’s own arrangements, while a plaintiff may separately seek help with personal expenses. The client should not be led to believe that a consumer funding agreement automatically covers a case expense or changes who is responsible for it. Check the engagement and provider documents, and explain any uncertainty before the client acts.

What should attorneys review in a post-settlement agreement?

Attorneys can help clients understand the document without steering them toward a particular choice. Start with the actual amount the client receives, the total amount that may be due, and the events that change that amount. Do not rely on a headline rate or a verbal description when the contract controls the calculation.

1. Confirm the amount and payment timing

Check the advance amount, any deductions or charges, and when the funds are expected to be provided. Then compare those terms with the likely timing of settlement disbursement. If timing is uncertain, say so. A provider’s estimate is not a guarantee that the case will be paid on a particular date.

2. Read the complete cost calculation

Find out whether the price uses simple or compounding interest, how often it accrues, and whether other fees apply. Ask for a written payoff example at more than one possible repayment date. A simple-interest arrangement does not compound interest, but the total can still increase as time passes. A “rate” by itself does not show the dollars that may be deducted from the recovery.

The Milestone Foundation describes its nonprofit model as offering post-settlement funding at 10% simple annual interest, without compounding, and a 2X cap on total repayment. Those are organization-specific terms, not a statement about every provider. Attorneys should verify the current written offer and review how its terms apply to the particular client. The Foundation’s funding FAQs and 501(c)(3) nonprofit background offer additional context about its model.

3. Identify the repayment source and order

Determine what proceeds will be used to repay the advance and how repayment fits into the distribution process. Review whether the agreement addresses attorney trust-account handling, payoff statements, liens, or other obligations. Do not assume that a client’s gross settlement equals the amount available after all deductions. If the agreement’s instructions do not align with the firm’s settlement-distribution process, resolve the question before the client signs.

4. Understand what happens if the case or payment changes

Check what the contract says if payment is delayed, reduced, disputed, or never received. A non-recourse structure generally ties repayment to a recovery, but the exact definition, exceptions, and procedures depend on the written agreement. Explain the actual wording rather than relying on the label alone. Ask the provider to clarify any provision that could leave the client with an obligation outside the expected recovery.

5. Protect informed client choice

Make clear that funding is optional and that a client can ask questions, compare terms, or decide not to proceed. Explain foreseeable effects on the net amount the client keeps. A funding discussion should not pressure the client to settle, reject a settlement, or change litigation decisions. Counsel remains responsible for independent legal advice about the case; the funding decision belongs to the client.

How can counsel discuss the options fairly?

A consistent process makes it easier to discuss funding without overstating what is known. First, define the need in the client’s own terms. Is there a specific personal bill? Is the client asking about costs the law firm has incurred? Is a settlement already reached but not yet disbursed? Record the difference so the client is not comparing products that do not serve the same purpose.

Then compare offers on the same basis. For each written proposal, note the amount the client would actually receive, the projected payoff on a stated date, how the balance changes if payment takes longer, and the conditions that apply if the case outcome or disbursement changes. If one offer includes a fee and another does not, include that fee in the comparison rather than comparing interest rates alone. If a provider cannot explain the calculation in plain language or provide a written illustration, pause and ask for clarification.

It can help to review a short timeline with the client: the present case stage, the event that permits an advance, any remaining release or disbursement steps, and the point at which repayment is expected. Label estimates as estimates. The attorney should not predict a settlement date or encourage a client to accept an offer because funding may be available. The purpose of the timeline is to make the contract’s timing easier to understand, not to forecast litigation outcomes.

1. Clarify the stage. Confirm whether the claim is pending, resolved, or awaiting payment after resolution.
2. Separate personal needs from case costs. Identify who is responsible for each expense and whether the funding product is designed for that obligation.
3. Review written terms. Compare the net amount delivered, the payoff at plausible dates, fees, interest method, cap, and repayment conditions.
4. Discuss alternatives. Where appropriate, consider whether payment timing, budgeting, available benefits, or another lawful source may meet the need. Do not imply an option is available unless it has been confirmed.
5. Document the discussion. Note the information provided, client questions, terms reviewed, and that the choice was voluntary.

Applicable professional-conduct requirements and state rules may vary. Attorneys should check the rules governing their practice and the facts of the engagement; the American Bar Association is a professional resource, but its general materials do not replace jurisdiction-specific guidance. Counsel can also consult the Foundation’s attorney funding information for its stated approach and direct product questions to the provider.

What should the file reflect after the discussion?

A clear file note can help show that the conversation focused on the client’s question and the terms actually reviewed. Record whether the need involved personal expenses or case costs, the stage of the claim, and the material documents the client considered. If counsel identified a timing estimate, note its source and any uncertainty. Keep the discussion factual; avoid characterizing an offer as risk-free, guaranteed, or best for the client unless the evidence and agreement support that description.

Document the client’s questions and the answers provided, including any request to explain interest, fees, non-recourse terms, or a repayment cap. If an issue required confirmation from the provider, record the follow-up and share the answer before the client makes a decision. Do not treat a marketing page as a substitute for the signed agreement. Where the client elects to proceed, follow the firm’s ordinary procedures for reviewing authorization, payoff instructions, and settlement disbursement obligations.

This recordkeeping does not replace legal judgment or jurisdiction-specific requirements. It supports a careful process: the client knows what the product does, what it costs, what is not yet known, and who to contact with a question. That is particularly important when the words “case funding” are being used for products with different purposes and payment timelines.

How does a nonprofit funding company fit into the review?

The Milestone Foundation is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit consumer litigation funding organization. Its nonprofit status does not make every funding offer suitable for every client, and it does not remove the need to review the written terms. It does explain the organization’s stated mission and operating model: the Foundation describes its advances as designed to help plaintiffs through financial hardship while their legal matters proceed or await payment.

When comparing providers, attorneys can ask how the organization is structured, how it describes its rates, whether interest compounds, whether fees are charged, and how repayment is limited. Look for answers in the agreement, not just in marketing language. The Foundation’s pages on nonprofit litigation funding and fair pre-settlement funding explain related parts of its model. The latter concerns a different point in the case timeline, so it should not be mistaken for post-settlement funding.

For plaintiff attorneys, the practical value of a funding company is not a promise of a specific result. It is whether the option fits the client’s timing and need, whether the costs and repayment terms are clear, and whether the client can make an informed choice without interference in counsel’s role.

Review funding information for clients

Frequently asked questions

Can a post-settlement advance pay a client’s earlier medical or household bills?

It may provide the client with funds after settlement or award, subject to approval and the written agreement, and the client may choose how to use those funds. It does not provide money during the earlier stage when the case is still pending. Counsel should review the terms and avoid promising that an advance will be approved or arrive by a particular date.

Is post-settlement funding the same as a law firm case-cost loan?

No. A post-settlement advance is generally discussed as money advanced to a plaintiff after resolution while proceeds are pending. A firm-level arrangement for litigation costs has a different borrower, purpose, and contract. Attorneys should identify who is borrowing and what the funds are meant to cover before assessing any option.

What matters more: the advertised rate or the payoff amount?

Both matter, but the client needs to understand the amount that may be repaid in dollars and how it can change over time. Ask for a written payoff illustration, confirm whether interest is simple or compounding, and identify every fee and repayment condition in the agreement.

What if the settlement payment is delayed?

Read the agreement’s provisions for timing and payoff calculation, then ask the provider for a written explanation of how a delay affects the amount due. Do not represent an estimated payment date as certain. The client should understand the possible effect before accepting an advance.

Make the funding question specific

When a client asks about litigation funding for case expenses, attorneys can begin by clarifying what expense is at issue and where the case stands. Post-settlement funding may address a client’s need after a resolution but before disbursement; it is not a source of funds for expenses that arise while litigation is ongoing. Reviewing timing, written costs, repayment, and the client’s freedom to choose helps keep the discussion accurate and centered on the client’s interests.