Since the enactment of section 5891 of the Internal



Similar documents
The Economic Growth and Tax Relief

How to Switch to Being a Benefit Corporation

ANNUAL QUALIFIED MORTGAGE INFORMATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO. v. NO. 27,407

The New Analytical Mindset For Finance and Accounting Professionals

California Supreme Court Issues Ruling in Brinker Clarifying Employers Duty to Provide Meal and Rest Breaks to Hourly Employees

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA : : : : : : : Chapter 11

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/09/2014 INDEX NO /2011 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 536 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/09/2014

Plaintiffs, V. AP # Defendants.

Anticipating Tomorrow: A Symposium on Emerging Legal Issues in Life Insurance

Unusual Illinois Decision May Impact Structured Purchasing Industry

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO

DOL Investigations: Broker-Dealers and RIAs as Targets

Possible Refund Claims for California LLC Fees Based on Unconstitutionality

If You Paid Overdraft Fees to Bank of America,

Fluor Corp. v. Superior Court: California Supreme

If You Paid Overdraft Fees on Debit Card Transactions to Bank of America, You May Be Eligible for a Payment from a Class Action Settlement.

Management Alert. California Supreme Court Approves Same-Sex Marriage & Bush Signs Genetic Information Act

What Notice Is Effective In Bankruptcy? Indirect Notice May Not Be Adequate Notice

Before the COPYRIGHT ROYALTY JUDGES Washington, D.C. PHASE I PARTIES' NOTICE OF PHASE I SETTLEMENT AND MOTION FOR FURTHER DISTRIBUTION

Court of Appeal No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT. UNITED STATES EX REL. JEFFREY E. MAIN Plaintiff/Appellant

Alert. Litigation May 2014

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE. Chapter 11

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. No. 99,491. KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Appellant, JILL POWELL, Appellee. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT

In Re Liquidation of Integrity Insurance Company: Cutting Off the Long-Tail of IBNR Claims

Carnegie Assoc., Ltd. v Crump Life Ins. Servs., Inc NY Slip Op 33478(U) November 17, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number:

YOUR PLANS. YOUR NEEDS. YOUR LAWYERS.

STEPHEN M. ORLOFSKY. Practice Concentration / v.2 A PENNSYLVANIA LLP

Notice of Class Action and Proposed Settlement

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT NOTICE

Lawyer Referral Programs. State, County, and City Lawyers Associations

Akerman Practice Update

11/11/2015. Insurance Bad Faith 22 nd Annual Auto Law Update 25 TH ANNIVERSARY. 42 Pa. C.S.A. 8371:


Externship: Philadelphia District Office of the EEOC, Philadelphia, PA: Mediated the full range of EEOC Complaints in the private sector.

BEFORE THE UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION ) ) ) ) ) )

FACT SHEET Contact: Office of Legislative and Public Affairs (703) Fax: (703)

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA TRIAL DIVISION-CIVIL

v. Record No OPINION BY JUSTICE ELIZABETH B. LACY June 8, 2007 CARLA VON NEUMANN-LILLIE

The Final 408(b)(2) Regulation: Impact on Investment Managers

Protecting Retirement Savings: The Retirement Loan Eraser TM

In The Supreme Court of the United States

ATTORNEYS. Insurance Agents & Brokers Errors & Omissions. LewisBrisbois.com

The Increasingly Regulated World of IRA Rollovers... and What to Do About It FRED REISH, ESQ.

Case 2:13-cv JWS Document 33 Filed 06/24/14 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

ALI-ABA Audio Seminar

A federal court directed this notice. This is not a solicitation from a lawyer.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

NJ High Court Looks At Liability For Uninsured Physician

Matter of Settlement Capital Corp. (Illescas) 2003 NY Slip Op 30241(U) December 22, 2003 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number:

What Counsel Should Know About the Risk to Clients of. White Paper - March 2015

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

September Edition of Notable Cases and Events in E-Discovery

Notice of Class Action Lawsuit and Proposed Settlement. You May be Entitled to Receive a Settlement Payment.

Case No. CV R NOTICE TO CLASS OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, KING COUNTY NOTICE OF PROPOSED CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

NOTICE OF PROPOSED CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

Pennsylvania Authorizes the Creation of Benefit Corporations

Personal Injury Litigation

TO: ALL PERSONS AND BUSINESSES WITH A VERIZON.NET ADDRESS

In the Indiana Supreme Court

GW Law Alumni Elective Courses Survey

The State of New Jersey, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

Losing The Bid: Philadelphia Newspapers Sale Dispute

Commencement of a Deficiency Proceeding and Pretrial Practice

Case KG Doc 288 Filed 12/17/14 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

DELAWARE SUPREME COURT RULES DIRECTORS OF A CORPORATION IN THE ZONE OF INSOLVENCY OWE NO FIDUCIARY DUTIES TO CREDITORS

State + Local Tax. Practice Description

JACKSON BROOK INSTITUTE, INC., et al. MAINE INSURANCE GUARANTY ASSOCIATION. [ 1] The United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Maine (Haines,

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

U.S. Metro Economies. Impact of Marketplace Fairness on Select Jurisdictions UPDATE. May 2013

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. This Settlement Agreement (hereafter Agreement ) is entered into by

Software Tax Cases in New Jersey and California

Commercial Litigation. LewisBr isbois.c o m

CLAIMS AGAINST FIRE DEPARTMENTS IN WASHINGTON AND OREGON. By: Jack Slavik. COZEN AND O'CONNOR 1201 Third Avenue Seattle WA 98101

IN THE SUPREME COURT THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

D.C., A MINOR V. HARVARD-WESTLAKE SCH., 98 Cal. Rptr. 3d 300. Plaintiff D.C., a student, appealed a Los Angeles Superior Court decision in favor of

Case 2:15-cv SHL-dkv Document 1 Filed 04/09/15 Page 1 of 16 PageID 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE

An Ohio court authorized this notice. This is not a solicitation from a lawyer. You are not being sued.

Our Commitment to Diversity

Case 1:04-cv RBK-AMD Document 540 Filed 08/21/2007 Page 1 of 7

Managing Defined Contribution Plan Investment Policy Statements

Challenging EEOC Conciliation Charges

Case 1:09-cv JPO-JCF Document 362 Filed 08/04/15 Page 1 of 8 : : : : : : EXHIBIT A

States and the federal government have laws, known generically as a

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EXECUTIVE BRANCH RESPONDENTS PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO THE PETITION FOR REVIEW

FOR THE PUBLIC GOOD WE TACKLE TOUGH CASES

Pennsylvania - Review of revised organization, procedures of tax appellate Board

Ethical issues raised in bulk settlement agreements in mass torts

Payment System Override Deems Transaction Not Ordinary

FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS REGULATORY UPDATE

Case3:12-cv SI Document89-1 Filed10/09/13 Page1 of 12. A federal court authorized this notice. This is not a solicitation from a lawyer.

Case3:07-cv JSW Document123 Filed10/12/12 Page1 of 5

Ticking Time Bombs in Irrevocable Life Insurance Trusts

Telephone: Fax: EDUCATIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS

Alani Golanski, for appellants. Christian H. Gannon, for respondent. A statute requires anyone who brings a lawsuit against

Latham & Watkins Finance Department. Amended Bankruptcy Rule 2019: Clarity and Confusion?

State & Local Tax Alert

Update on Transfer Issues

Transcription:

September 2002 S TRUCTURED S ETTLEMENT U PDATE Since the enactment of section 5891 of the Internal Revenue Code, there has been a substantial increase in the number of petitions filed for approval of factoring transactions. Indeed, certain of the representatives of the factoring industry seem to have taken the position that the new federal legislation, when coupled with the existing and expanding state legislation, operates to not just regulate factoring transactions but to automatically validate them. Although many insurers have adjusted their strategies for responding to factoring transactions, it most certainly can not be said that all factoring transactions are valid and that anti-assignment language is no longer to be given effect. Indeed, recent case law has indicated exactly the opposite. On August 16, 2002, in WebBank v. American General Annuity Service Corp., et al., P.2d (Utah 2002), the Utah Supreme Court reversed and remanded a trial court decision that had held that certain factoring transactions were loans and that the anti-assignment language at issue was therefore invalid. Recognizing that, at the very least, the transactions created a question of fact with respect to whether they were loans or sales, the Utah Supreme Court precluded WebBank and its joint venture partner, Settlement Funding, L.L.C. (i.e., Peachtree), from achieving the drive-thru justice that they were desperately seeking. In Singer Asset Finance Company, L.L.C. v. CGU Life Insurance Company of America, 2002 LEXIS 590 (Georgia Sup. Ct., July 15, 2002), the Supreme Court of Georgia not only invalidated the factoring transaction in question, but found that the elimination of the insurers tax concerns (by section 5891) did not have any effect on the result. This decision, although at first improperly articulated by the Georgia Supreme Court, now constitutes strong precedent for precluding factoring transactions, when necessary and appropriate, even though the federal legislation has eliminated section 130 and section 72 tax concerns. Finally, in Singer Asset Finance Company, L.L.C. v. Johnny L. Bachus a/k/a/ Johnny Backus, et al., 741 N.Y.S.2d 681 (4th Dept. 2002), the Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, sent a clear message to Singer Asset Finance Company that it will no longer be permitted to commence actions against annuitants without naming the involved insurance companies as parties, and will instead have to provide the involved insurance companies with early notice and an opportunity to be heard. This case should be of considerable assistance in connection with the many dispute cases that still exist despite the enactment of section 5891 and the related state legislation. 1 The lesson to be drawn from these cases is not necessarily that insurers should again adjust their strategies and renew their vigorous opposition to factoring transactions, but that, even if insurers are stipulating to these transactions and permitting them, in appropriate circumstances, to go forward, these insurers need not be bullied by the factoring companies. Rather, if necessary and appropriate, the insurers can still successfully challenge the validity of factoring transactions. Lawyers at Drinker Biddle represented the insurers in three of the four cases referenced in this Update and are available to discuss these matters in greater detail. The text of all of the cases referenced in this Update appear below. 1. Even more recently, in Singer Asset Finance Company, L.L.C. v. John Cardillo, Supreme Court of New York, New York County,Trial Division, No. 100688-02 (August 7, 2002), a decision was rendered whereby, even before the insurance company was named in the case, Singer Asset Finance Company was precluded by the court, sua sponte,from obtaining a default judgment against the annuitant. Briefly stated, it seems that the courts in New York have caught onto, and have had enough of, this factoring company s litigation practices. www.drinkerbiddle.com Structured Settlement Update September 2002

Structured Settlement Update Author: Michael J. Miller Questions regarding this Structured Settlement Update should be directed to: Stephen C. Baker...215-988-2769...Stephen.Baker@dbr.com Michael J. Miller...215-988-2782...Michael.Miller@dbr.com Jeff A. Almeida...215-988-2846...Jeff.Almeida@dbr.com Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, a Pennsylvania Limited Liability Partnership, is a full service law firm headquartered since 1849 in Philadelphia, PA. Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP practices as Drinker Biddle & Shanley LLP in New Jersey. With more than 425 attorneys, the firm represents a broad spectrum of public and private, commercial, financial and educational enterprises, governmental authorities, charities and individuals throughout the United States and abroad. This Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP Structured Settlement Update is intended to inform our clients and friends of developments in the law and to provide information of general interest. It is not intended to constitute legal advice regarding any client's legal problems and should not be relied upon as such. 2002. All rights reserved. PHILADELPHIA Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP One Logan Square 18th and Cherry Streets Philadelphia, PA 19103-6996 215-988-2700 215-988-2757 (fax) BERWYN Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP Suite 300 1000 Westlakes Drive Berwyn, PA 19312-2409 610-993-2200 610-993-8585 (fax) PRINCETON Drinker Biddle & Shanley LLP Suite 300 105 College Road East Post Office Box 627 Princeton, NJ 08542-0627 609-716-6500 609-799-7000 (fax) Jonathan I. Epstein, Partner in charge WASHINGTON Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP Suite 1100 1500 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20005-1209 202-842-8800 202-842-8465/66 (fax) LOS ANGELES Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP Wells Fargo Building 333 South Grand Avenue Suite 1700 Los Angeles, CA 90071-1504 213-253-2300 213-253-2301 (fax) SAN FRANCISCO Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP 225 Bush Street, 15th Floor San Francisco, CA 94104-4207 415-397-1730 415-397-1731 (fax) FLORHAM PARK Drinker Biddle & Shanley LLP 500 Campus Drive Florham Park, NJ 07932-1047 973-360-1100 973-360-9831 (fax) Daniel F. O Connell, Partner in charge NEW YORK Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP 30 Broad Street, 30th Floor New York, NY 10004-2953 212-248-3140 212-248-3141 (fax) Structured Settlement Update September 2002 Page 2