Browsed by
Author: Peter Vodola

What Happens When Factoring Companies Ignore Requirements Of Pennsylvania Structured Settlement Protection Act? Recent PSU Report, and Previous Experience In Phillips, Provide Some Examples

What Happens When Factoring Companies Ignore Requirements Of Pennsylvania Structured Settlement Protection Act? Recent PSU Report, and Previous Experience In Phillips, Provide Some Examples

My partner, Kathy Scanlon wrote here and here about a recent Pennsylvania Structured Settlement Protection Act matter, and offered some comments about the statute and relevant judicial rule.  Kathy is admitted to practice in Pennsylvania, and her experience in Pennsylvania structured settlement factoring matters goes back two decades. One Pennsylvania SSPA proceeding that Kathy won early in the statute’s existence illustrates some of the points she made about the need for careful judicial review of such proceedings. In the case…

Read More Read More

Another Reason To Reject Proposed Transaction: No Proof That Settlement Factoring Company Served Payee, Says Court

Another Reason To Reject Proposed Transaction: No Proof That Settlement Factoring Company Served Payee, Says Court

As described here, a New York court this year rejected an “unconscionable” proposed transfer of structured settlement payment rights as failing to meet either the “best interest” or “fair and reasonable” standard of the New York Structured Settlement Protection Act. Acting Supreme Court Justice John H. Rouse, in In the Matter of the Petition of J.G. Wentworth Originations, LLC (Sanders), Index No. 001145, Supreme Court, Suffolk County, N.Y. (N.Y. Sup. Ct. May 21, 2018), also said that the factoring company failed to…

Read More Read More

New York Judge Rejects ‘Unconscionable’ Settlement Factoring Transaction

New York Judge Rejects ‘Unconscionable’ Settlement Factoring Transaction

A New York trial court earlier this year rejected a proposed transfer of structured settlement payment rights as “unconscionable”, since it would involve an exchange of payments “with a present value of $135,010.00 for a sum of only $10,000.00”. In the Matter of the Petition of J.G. Wentworth Originations, LLC (Sanders), Index No. 001145, Supreme Court, Suffolk County, N.Y. (N.Y. Sup. Ct. May 21, 2018), involved a proposed transfer of structured settlement payment rights by payee Frank Sanders. The court…

Read More Read More

Court: No Fraud By Owners In Financing Of Settlement Factoring Company Sale

Court: No Fraud By Owners In Financing Of Settlement Factoring Company Sale

A New York court last month issued an opinion in a long-running dispute over the financing of a sale of a structured settlement factoring company, dismissing the claims that the owners of the factoring company engaged in fraud to shield assets from the prospective purchaser. In describing the decision, one news report put it this way: “A New York state judge . . . threw out an investment company’s lawsuit accusing the majority owners of a structured-settlement buyout company of…

Read More Read More

Billionaire’s Investment Is ‘Latest Twist’ in Lawsuit Funding, Say Reports

Billionaire’s Investment Is ‘Latest Twist’ in Lawsuit Funding, Say Reports

News reports say that billionaire investor George Soros is getting involved in backing a litigation funding company – the “latest twist on the litigation funding market, which has drawn criticism for monetizing and encouraging the lawsuit culture in the U.S. The firm.” That’s the way one report described the development – see Soros Sees Mighty Big Gains In Investment Portfolios Made Out Of Lawsuits (available here). Other stories include the following: “How George Soros Is Making Money Off Personal Injury Financing,”…

Read More Read More

Court That Ruled CFPB Unconstitutional Also Concludes That Judge In NFL Concussion Litigation Was Correct To Invalidate Lawsuit Funding Deals

Court That Ruled CFPB Unconstitutional Also Concludes That Judge In NFL Concussion Litigation Was Correct To Invalidate Lawsuit Funding Deals

A federal court has concluded that the structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is unconstitutional.  In the ruling, described here and here,  the court dismissed the CFPB as a party but allowed the New York Attorney General to proceed with claims against a litigation funding company, RD Legal Funding (RD), for violations of federal and state law. One important issue that the court reached was whether the judge overseeing the NFL concussion litigation was correct in is view of…

Read More Read More

Court Describes Circuitous Route of NFL Concussion Litigation, Other Claims, to Recent CFPB Ruling

Court Describes Circuitous Route of NFL Concussion Litigation, Other Claims, to Recent CFPB Ruling

As described here, a federal court this month ruled that the structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is unconstitutional. The court nonetheless denied the motion to dismiss by litigation funding company RD Legal Funding, because it ruled that the New York Attorney General had authority to challenge the transactions between RD and personal injury victims, including ex-National Football League players. U.S. District Court judge Loretta Preska also described the circuitous route by which she was asked to address the…

Read More Read More

In Litigation Over Litigation Funding Matters, Court Rules that CFPB’s Structure Is Unconstitutional

In Litigation Over Litigation Funding Matters, Court Rules that CFPB’s Structure Is Unconstitutional

The structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is unconstitutional, and therefore claims of federal law violations against a litigation funding company fail. So ruled a U.S. District Court judge in a lawsuit brought by the CFPB and the New York Attorney General against a litigation funding company over, for one, the litigation funding company’s dealings with former National Football League players and, for another, the company’s transactions with individuals who suffered injuries as a result of the September 11,…

Read More Read More

U.S. Chamber of Commerce: Litigation Financing Means More Lawsuits, Prolonged Proceedings, Fewer Settlements

U.S. Chamber of Commerce: Litigation Financing Means More Lawsuits, Prolonged Proceedings, Fewer Settlements

The President of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has penned an opinion piece stating that litigation financing “leads to more lawsuits, undercuts plaintiffs’ control of a case, and unnecessarily prolongs litigation.” Lisa Rickard’s op-ed article quoted recent news reports about how litigation funders have said they “make it harder and more expensive to settle cases.” She praised the recently-enacted Wisconsin legislators who passed “the first state law requiring transparency for all third-party funding arrangements” and said that Congress should recognize…

Read More Read More

New York Legislation Would Regulate Litigation Funding Deals

New York Legislation Would Regulate Litigation Funding Deals

New York’s legislature is considering legislation that would regulate consumer litigation funding transactions. The New York Law Journal reported this week that “[t]hird-party litigation financing is getting closer scrutiny in New York, where lawmakers are pushing to regulate an industry in which companies have been accused of charging unreasonably high fees and interest rates.” The May 29 article, NY Lawmakers Considering Bills to Regulate Consumer Litigation Funding, is available here.