A ruling in December by the judge overseeing the $1 billion settlement between the National Football League and ex-players with cognitive-disability claims stemming from their football playing careers has now led to an appeal.
The ruling – that a contractual anti-assignment clause (in the settlement agreement between the ex-players and the NFL) rendered void any assignment agreements between the ex-players and litigation funding companies – is being appeal by one of the litigation funding companies.
RD Legal Funding filed the notice of appeal last week. One news story about the ruling, “Litigation Funder Appeals Ban on Assignment of Claims in NFL Concussion Case”, is available here.
Judge Anita Brody, in her December ruling, said that “[t]he anti-assignment language in the settlement agreement clearly states the intent that class members are unable to make assignments.” She also added that the litigation funding companies were aware, or should have been aware, of the anti-assignment provision, and, “[t]hus, the court has little sympathy for a third-party funder that will not receive a return on its ‘investment.’”
The companies loaned money to the ex-players while they waited for the settlement monies to be paid, according to news reports.
An earlier Secondary Insurance Market Blog post about Judge Brody’s December ruling is available here.