Just wanted to get slightly history spergy here about the concept of "champerty and maintenance". The concept refers, in common law, to the practice of a powerful individual lending his backing to a slight or weak or frivolous lawsuit, usually in exchange for a portion of any proceeds derived from such lawsuit.
In history, this usually was seen when a powerful person, usually a nobleman, backed a weak suit against a personal enemy. Usually with money, but sometimes with threats of force. As
@AnOminous said earlier, it's a zombie concept nowadays. We don't have Lords commanding military forces overawing a weak judicial system anymore. We don't give preferential treatment to a plaintiff now, no matter who raises money for the suit or who stands behind the plaintiff. They can't credibly argue Nick is going to surround the courthouse with armed men to intimidate the judge. They can't credibly argue that the court is going to give undue weight to one litigant over another because they have more money. Not to mention that this lawsuit isn't weak, or frivolous, or insubstantial. Not to mention that if this were champerty, just why the fuck would Vic have filed suit against a rich and powerful company like Funimation?
