Barratry is the improper solicitation of a client done by or on behalf of an attorney and is a criminal offense in most states. The filing of a lawsuit or other legal complaint without the permission of the named plaintiff or complainant may also constitute barratry. And a judge who accepts a bribe in exchange for a favorable decision may be guilty of barratry.

Maintenance refers to improper assistance in prosecuting or defending a lawsuit, provided by someone who has no legitimate interest in the case—also known as meddling in someone else's litigation.

And champerty is an agreement between a litigant and an intermeddler in a lawsuit in which the intermeddler helps the litigant pursue the claim in exchange for receiving part of any settlement or judgment in the litigation.

Laws regarding barratry, maintenance, and champerty vary from state to state and are usually located in a state's statutes—often in the penal code or criminal code. Barratry is illegal in all states, with criminal prosecution and state licensing implications for attorneys who engage in the practice. But the maintenance and champerty doctrines are not recognized in all states.

In New York, barratry, which includes the improper solicitation of clients by an attorney, is considered unethical and can lead to disciplinary action by the state's bar association. While New York does not have a specific criminal statute titled 'barratry,' actions that constitute barratry could fall under other criminal offenses such as fraud or bribery, depending on the circumstances. Maintenance and champerty were historically prohibited under New York law, but these doctrines have been significantly eroded over time. New York Judiciary Law Section 489(1) prohibits buying or being interested in claims with the intent of bringing a lawsuit. However, certain exceptions exist, such as allowing investment in litigation by parties with a bona fide interest in the outcome, and the law has been further relaxed to permit third-party litigation financing under specific conditions. It's important to note that while some aspects of these doctrines may still apply, they do not carry the same weight as they once did, and New York courts have recognized legitimate litigation financing arrangements.