Assume without deciding that the District Court erred in holding that the document was not sufficiently authenticated in liminal proceedings because three of the signatures were not authenticated.
Foreign state's law treats champerty as an affirmative defense to formation; since the champerty claim implicated the merits determination, summary judgment standard would likely be appropriate, even in the context of a motion to dismiss.
Appeal of champerty finding that doesn't mention the procedural posture of the determination below forfeits any challenge to the standard of review.
Since the litigation trust created by the injured party as both grantor and beneficiary and to which the claim was assigned in an exchange for value would retain a fixed percentage of any recovery, the agreement was void for champerty under the state's law, and the litigation trust therefore did not have sufficient Article III standing.
PDVSA US Litigation Trust v. Lukoil Pan Americas, LLC, et al