Anomalous: One Way to Describe Kentucky Intermediate Appellate Court’s 2-1 Opinion in Structured Settlement Protection Act Case

Anomalous: One Way to Describe Kentucky Intermediate Appellate Court’s 2-1 Opinion in Structured Settlement Protection Act Case

  “Anomalous” is, according to the Dictionary.com, an adjective that has several meanings.  One “deviating from or inconsistent with the common order, form, or rule; irregular; abnormal.”  A second definition is “not fitting into a common or familiar type, classification, or pattern; unusual.”  And a third is “incongruous or inconsistent.” An opinion released by the Kentucky intermediate appellate court can be described as anomalous.  There are no other appellate opinions like it, and the those that address similar issues – even…

Read More Read More

Illinois Offers No Guarantee That It Will Make Lottery Payments, Says Chicagoan in News Story on State’s Budget Woes

Illinois Offers No Guarantee That It Will Make Lottery Payments, Says Chicagoan in News Story on State’s Budget Woes

“Powerball was the only thing that I would buy, because I knew that it would pay out,” said Anthony Martinez, who lives in the Logan Square neighborhood. “With the Illinois budget crisis, it’s not a guarantee that Illinois’ going to actually pay out on your lottery winnings.” That person-on-the-street comment appeared in an article headlined, “Powerball, Mega Millions to drop Illinois due to state’s budget crisis” that ran in the Chicago Sun-Times last week. For more about the Illinois lottery’s troubles making payments,…

Read More Read More

Selling Future Structured Settlement Payments For Less Than Half The Present Value Is Not ‘Fair and Reasonable’, Says New York Court

Selling Future Structured Settlement Payments For Less Than Half The Present Value Is Not ‘Fair and Reasonable’, Says New York Court

The proposed sale would involve an exchange of future structured settlement payments with a face value of $90,951 and a discounted present value of $71,729 – and a proposed purchase price of $32,652. That was enough for the court to reject the sale. The proposed purchase price “is less than half of the discount[ed] present value, and therefore, is not ‘fair and reasonable,’” said New York Supreme Court Justice Thomas Feinman earlier this month in an opinion captioned In the Matter…

Read More Read More

Litigation Funding Rule Change May Take A While

Litigation Funding Rule Change May Take A While

Don’t hold your breath. That’s one way to summarize the National Law Journal’s summary of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s long-term plan to try to rein-in litigation funding via a change to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The piece, entitled Lit Funding Opponents Play Long Game in Bid for Transparency, points out that the federal rules change process is designed to take more than two years – at least. The article is available in full here.  Another recent Secondary…

Read More Read More

A Primer on Champerty and Lawsuit Funding – and Impact on Insurers – Is Part of Report On U.S. Chamber’s Support for Federal Rule Change

A Primer on Champerty and Lawsuit Funding – and Impact on Insurers – Is Part of Report On U.S. Chamber’s Support for Federal Rule Change

What’s champerty?  How does it relate to litigation funding? And why should it matter to the insurance industry? These are a few questions addressed this month in a short but pithy piece in the National Law Review, “U.S. Chamber Seeks New Federal Rule Requiring Disclosure Of Third-Party Litigation Funding Arrangements” (available here). As for the answers: (1) champerty is “an agreement between an officious intermeddler in a lawsuit and a litigation by which the intermeddler helps pursue the litigant’s claim…

Read More Read More

Court Rules For Maryland Attorney General, Denies Factoring Company’s Motion to Dismiss Lawsuit

Court Rules For Maryland Attorney General, Denies Factoring Company’s Motion to Dismiss Lawsuit

As described in this Secondary Insurance Market Blog post from May, 2016, a little more than a year ago, the Maryland Attorney General filed a lawsuit that alleged that factoring company Access Funding, LLC, along with other defendants, made misrepresentations to Maryland courts when the company obtained more than 100 court orders approving transfers of structured settlement payment rights, and that those orders therefore should be invalidated. The Attorney General said that Access Funding engaged in unfair practices that included targeting…

Read More Read More

Add Oregon to List of States Enforcing Insurers’ Contract Rights under Structured Settlement Agreements

Add Oregon to List of States Enforcing Insurers’ Contract Rights under Structured Settlement Agreements

As described in this post, the Oregon Courts of Appeals in Johnson v. J.G. Wentworth Originations, LLC, 284 Ore. App. 47, 2017 Ore. App. LEXIS 280  (Ore. Ct. App. Mar. 1, 2017), earlier this year upheld the rights of a structured settlement obligor and annuity issuer to enforce a contractual anti-assignment provision and thereby preclude a proposed structured settlement factoring transaction. The post pointed out that the decision, in a proceeding commenced pursuant to the Oregon Structured Settlement Protection Act, applied California law, and followed “earlier precedent…

Read More Read More

Court Rules Against Pension Factoring Company That Challenged Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s Authority, Investigation

Court Rules Against Pension Factoring Company That Challenged Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s Authority, Investigation

A federal court has upheld the constitutionality of the Consumer Financial Protection Board’s structure, and further found that the CFPB’s investigation into a pension factoring company’s business practices was neither overboard nor outside the CFPB’s jurisdiction. In Consumer Fin. Prot. Bureau v. Future Income Payments, LLC, Case No. SACV 17-00303-JLS ((SSx), 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80074 (C.D. Cal. May 17, 2017), Judge Josephine L. Staton of the federal district court for the Central District of California granted the CFPB’s petition…

Read More Read More

Forbes Reports That Litigation Finance Company Faces Lawsuit By Former Customers Over Allegations of Too-High Interest Rates

Forbes Reports That Litigation Finance Company Faces Lawsuit By Former Customers Over Allegations of Too-High Interest Rates

  Forbes this month reports that a litigation finance company has been sued by former customers, who have alleged that the company charged usurious interest rates.  Says reported John O’Brien in the May 9 article, Customers Sue Legal Finance Company, Allege Interest Rates Over 100%: Six individuals who did business with Oasis [Legal Finance] are suing the company in Georgia, asking for a federal judge to declare the interest rates charged by the company in violation of the lending laws of…

Read More Read More

Latest Development in Lawsuit Over Invalidated Settlement Factoring Order: Court Awards Fees to Re-Assignees

Latest Development in Lawsuit Over Invalidated Settlement Factoring Order: Court Awards Fees to Re-Assignees

The Wall v. Altium litigation’s latest development is another win for the Walls, the re-assignee investors who did not receive the settlement payments that they thought they had purchased because the order approving the sale was later deemed to be void. In a May 10, 2017, opinion, the federal court for the Western District of Pennsylvania awarded the Walls attorneys’ fees and costs in their lawsuit against the financial advisors who connected them with factoring company Corona Capital. As set…

Read More Read More