COURT OF APPEALS KNOX COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT



Similar documents
COURT OF APPEALS DELAWARE COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

[Cite as Huff v. All Am. Basement Waterproofing & Home Servs., Inc., 190 Ohio App.3d 612, 2010-Ohio-6002.]

COURT OF APPEALS MUSKINGUM COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

COURT OF APPEALS ASHLAND COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

6 th Floor, Bulkley Building SCOTT MYERS 1501 Euclid Avenue 30 East Broad Street, 26 th Floor Cleveland, OH Columbus, OH 43215

How To Get A Sentence For A Drug Violation

144 East Main Street 500 South Fourth Street P.O. Box 667 Columbus, OH Lancaster, OH 43130

526 East Main Street P.O. Box 2385 Alliance, OH Akron, OH 44309

Court of Appeals of Ohio

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR CHAMPAIGN COUNTY, OHIO. Plaintiff-Appellee : C.A. CASE NO CA 1. v. : T.C. NO. 07DR226

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT VAN WERT COUNTY PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, CASE NO

COURT OF APPEALS KNOX COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

COURT OF APPEALS STARK COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

S.B rd General Assembly (As Introduced)

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO HAMILTON COUNTY, OHIO

COURT OF APPEALS STARK COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT. JUDGES: Hon. William B. Hoffman, P.J. Hon. Julie A. Edwards, J. Hon. John F. Boggins, J.

COURT OF APPEALS RICHLAND COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

COURT OF APPEALS STARK COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT. Appellant-Appellant, : No. 13AP-622 v. : (C.P.C. No. 13CVF-1688)

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT TRUMBULL COUNTY, OHIO

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OHIO. Plaintiffs-Appellees : C.A. CASE NO v. : T.C. NO. 12CV946

Court of Appeals of Ohio

Court of Appeals of Ohio

OHIO BOARD OF TAX APPEALS

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT D E C I S I O N. Rendered on December 9, 2014

495 South High Street 12 th Floor Suite 450 Columbus, OH Columbus, OH 43215

1370 West Sixth Street, Suite Aaronwood Avenue, NE, Suite 101 Cleveland, Ohio Massillon, Ohio 44646

COURT OF APPEALS TUSCARAWAS COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

Court of Appeals of Ohio

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION EIGHT

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO WARREN COUNTY. : O P I N I O N - vs - 10/21/2013 :

COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA NO

[Cite as State ex rel. Boston Hills Property Invests., L.L.C. v. Boston Hts., 2008-Ohio-5329.]

STATE OF OHIO, MAHONING COUNTY IN THE COURT OF APPEALS SEVENTH DISTRICT IN RE GUARDIANSHIP ) CASE NO. 04 MA 58 BROCKMAN. ) ) ) O P I N I O N ) ) ) )

Court of Appeals of Ohio

Court of Appeals of Ohio

Illinois Official Reports

COURT OF APPEALS RICHLAND COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

2015 IL App (3d) U. Order filed February 26, 2015 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS THIRD DISTRICT A.D., 2015

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT MONTGOMERY COUNTY

Secretary of the Senate. Chief Clerk of the Assembly. Private Secretary of the Governor

SENATE BILL No. 510 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY JULY 14, 2009 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY JUNE 24, 2009 AMENDED IN SENATE MAY 5, 2009 AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 13, 2009

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

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT. Appellant-Appellee, : No. 11AP-544 v. : (C.P.C. No. 11CVF )

(a) FLORIDA LOTTO is a lottery online terminal game in which players select six (6) numbers from a field of

Court of Appeals of Ohio

STATE OF OHIO, MAHONING COUNTY IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

No WC IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION DIVISION

corporate Sponsorship Agreements - Without Evidence Is Not a Case Study

COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS 2012 COA 55. In re the complaint filed by the City of Colorado Springs, Colorado, ORDER AFFIRMED

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO HAMILTON COUNTY, OHIO

[Cite as Atlanta Mtge. & Invest. Corp. v. Sayers, Ohio-844.] COURT OF APPEALS ASHTABULA COUNTY, OHIO J U D G E S

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT D E C I S I O N. Rendered on December 28, 2012

Eleventh Court of Appeals

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT. (Sacramento) ----

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OHIO. CYNTHIA M. FOX : (Civil Appeal from Common Pleas Court) Defendant-Appellee :

STATE OF LOUISIANA NO KA-1429 VERSUS COURT OF APPEAL JACOLVY NELLON FOURTH CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * * *

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE September 2000 Session

No IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT. : (Prob. No ) [Executor, Richard B. Igo, : (REGULAR CALENDAR) Appellant]. : D E C I S I O N

COURT OF APPEALS MUSKINGUM COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

Court of Appeals of Ohio

OHIO BOARD OF TAX APPEALS

COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT. IN RE: ALL KELLEY & FERRARO : JOURNAL ENTRY ASBESTOS CASES : : and : : OPINION REVERSED AND REMANDED

Order No Docket No. BE IN THE MATTER OF BEFORE THE BANKING GONZALEZ FUNERAL HOME;

Court of Appeals of Ohio

GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 1999 SESSION LAW SENATE BILL 746

COURT OF APPEALS THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT ALLEN COUNTY PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE CASE NO

How To Find That A Medical Malpractice Claim Is Not Grounds For A Court Action

[Cite as Columbus City School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Wilkins, 101 Ohio St.3d 112, 2004-Ohio- 296.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO HAMILTON COUNTY, OHIO

CITY OF CLEVELAND LABORERS INTERNATIONAL UNION LOCAL 1099

The Sale of Structured Settlements in Minnesota

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT LUCAS COUNTY. Trial Court No. DR Appellant Decided: August 16, 2013 * * * * *

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO BUTLER COUNTY

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

The N.C. State Bar v. Wood NO. COA (Filed 1 February 2011) 1. Attorneys disciplinary action convicted of criminal offense

No CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS. FRED ANDERSON, Appellant. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT MONTGOMERY COUNTY

The General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania hereby enacts as follows:

[Cite as State ex rel. Washington v. Indus. Comm., 112 Ohio St.3d 86, 2006-Ohio-6505.]

Court of Appeals of Ohio

Court of Appeals of Ohio

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

Administrative License Suspension, Issues Warranting a Termination : A Quick Guide To Regaining Your Driver s License After a DUI Arrest

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OHIO THE ESTATE OF RONALD R. WERTS : C.A. CASE NO : T.C. CASE NO. 05EST349

MINNESOTA STATE LOTTERY GAME PROCEDURES SLOTS PROGRESSIVE PRINT-N-PLAY LOTTO GAME ADOPTED: AUGUST 23, 2010 AMENDED: SEPTEMBER 8, 2010

Workers' Compensation Commission Division Filed: June 19, No WC

STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY

THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLANT,

Illinois Official Reports

2014 IL App (3d) U. Order filed January 9, 2014 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS THIRD DISTRICT A.D., 2014 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER

COURT OF APPEALS LICKING COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

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

Sub. H.B. 9 * 126th General Assembly (As Reported by H. Civil and Commercial Law)

Title 24-A: MAINE INSURANCE CODE

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON October 11, 2005 Session

Illinois Official Reports

Transcription:

[Cite as In re Application of Statewide Funding Group LLC, 2004-Ohio-5760.] COURT OF APPEALS KNOX COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT IN RE JUDGES Hon. W. Scott Gwin, P.J. THE APPLICATION OF STATEWIDE Hon. John W. Wise, J. FUNDING GROUP, LLC FOR AN ORDER Hon. John F. Boggins, J. ALLOWING ASSIGNMENT OF LOTTERY WINNINGS OF ALAN J. STONE Case No. 04CA000006 O P I N I O N CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING JUDGMENT Appeal from the Knox County Common Pleas Court, Probate Division, Case No. 203-7008 Affirmed DATE OF JUDGMENT ENTRY OCTOBER 25, 2004 APPEARANCES For APPELLANT STATE WIDE FUNDING GROUP, LLC For INTERVENOR-APPELLEE OHIO LOTTERY COMMISSION BRUCE R. FREEDMAN JIM PETRO, Attorney General 304 N. Cleveland-Massillon Road KATE A. OKLOK, Asst. Atty. General. Akron, Ohio 44333 30 East Broad Streeet, 26 th Floor Columbus, Ohio 43215-3428 Boggins, J. { 1} This is an appeal from the January 26, 2004, judgment of the Knox County Court of Common Pleas, Probate Division, finding that Ohio Administrative Code Rule

37701-8-01 prohibited the assignment of part of Alan Stone s remaining yearly lottery proceeds to Appellant Statewide Funding Group, LLC. STATEMENT OF THE FACTS AND CASE { 2} Appellant Statewide Funding Group, LLC is a limited liability company engaged in the business of factoring of proceeds from lottery prizes. { 3} In the instant case, Alan Stone, a 13 million dollar Super Lottery prize winner, wanted to sell and assign part of his remaining lottery prize award payments to Appellant. { 4} In the past, Ohio lottery prizes were nontransferable but under recently enacted law, lottery prize awards may now be sold. { 5} Mr. Stone won his lottery prize on October 4, 1989, and elected to take his prize in twenty annual installments. To date he has received fifteen payments in the gross amount of $650,000.00 each. The five remaining payments are the subject of this Application which was made pursuant to R.C. Section 3770 in the Probate Court of Knox County. { 6} The Ohio Lottery Commission entered an appearance under R.C. 3770.13(B)(3) and objected to the terms and conditions of the application. Specifically, the Lottery Commission objected to the imposition of a constructive trust in paragraph H of the Lottery Prize Assignment Agreement stating that pursuant to R.C. 3770.12(I) and Ohio Administrative Code Rule 37701-8-01, any assignment which required a part of a yearly prize to be paid to a transferee, as opposed to his entire interest, was not permissible.

{ 7} The application came on for hearing before the Probate Court with supplemental briefs submitted on the issue of whether the application for partial transfer from each of Mr. Stone s remaining prize payments was allowable. { 8} On January 26, 2004, the trial court found that the administrative rule prohibited such assignments. { 9} Appellant now appeals, assigning the following error for review ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR { 10} I. TRIAL COURT ERRED IN DENYING THE APPLICATION OF STATEWIDE FUNDING FOR ASSIGNMENT OF A PORTION OF ALAN STONE S LOTTERY WINNINGS AND IN FINDING THAT THE OHIO LOTTERY COMMISSION S ADMINISTRATIVE RULE IS NOT IN DEROGATION OF THE STATUTE PERMITTING TRANSFER OF LOTTERY PROCEEDS. I. { 11} Appellant argues that the trial court erred in finding that the assignment is in derogation of the administrative rule. We disagree. { 12} Revised Code 3770.12 controls approval of transfers of lottery prize awards. The version in effect at the time of the filing of Appellant s application provided in pertinent part { 13} A court of competent jurisdiction may approve a transfer of a lottery prize award only in a final order that is based on the express findings of the court, and the express findings shall include all of the following { 14} (I) Except as provided in divisions (G) and (H) of this section, that the transferor's interest in each and all of the future payments from a particular lottery prize

award is to be paid to a single transferee, or, if the payments from the lottery prize award are to be directed from the state lottery commission to multiple transferees, the commission has promulgated rules under section 3770.03 of the Revised Code permitting transfers to multiple transferees, and the transfer is consistent with those rules. (emphasis added). { 15} In order to carry out said charge contained in R.C. 3770.12, the Ohio Lottery Commission promulgated Ohio Administrative Code Rule 37701-8-01, which provides in relevant part { 16} (B) Claimant eligible to receive payment { 17} (7) Assignments and/or transfers of lottery prize awards are governed by sections 3770.07, and 3770.10 to 3770.14 of the Revised Code. Pursuant to sections 3770.11 to 3770.14 of the Revised Code regarding the voluntary transfer of lottery prize awards via the sale, assignment, or redirection of payment of all or part of a lottery prize award for consideration, a court of competent jurisdiction may approve a transfer of a lottery prize award only in a final order that is based on the express findings of the court, and the express findings shall include all of the following { 18} (a) If the transferor is a prize winner, the transferee has provided to the prize winner a disclosure statement that complies with section 3770.11 of the Revised Code, and the prize winner has confirmed the prize winner's receipt of the disclosure statement, as evidenced by the prize winner's notarized signature on a copy of the disclosure statement. { 19} (b) If the transferor is a prize winner, the prize winner has established that the transfer is fair and reasonable and in the best interests of the prize winner.

{ 20} (c) If the transferor is a prize winner, the prize winner has received independent professional advice regarding the legal and other implications of the transfer. { 21} (d) The transferee has given written notice of the transferee's name, address, and taxpayer identification number to the commission and has filed a copy of that notice with the court in which the application for approval of the transfer was filed. { 22} (e) The transferee is a trust, limited partnership, general partnership, corporation, professional association, limited liability company, or other entity that is qualified to do business in this state and meets the registration requirements for that type of entity under Title XVII of the Revised Code. { 23} (f) The transfer complies with all applicable requirements of the Revised Code and does not contravene any applicable law. { 24} (g) The transfer does not include or cover the amounts or any part(s) of a lottery prize award that are required to be withheld or deducted pursuant to section 3119.80, 3119.81, 3121.02, 3121.03, 3123.06, 3770.071, or 3770.072 of the Revised Code. { 25} (h) Any amounts described in paragraph (B)(7)(g) of this rule that are required to be withheld or deducted, as of the date of the court order, will be offset by the commission first against remaining payments due the transferor and then against payments due the transferee. { 26} (i) Except as provided in paragraphs (B)(7)(g) and (B)(7)(h) of this rule, that the transferor's entire interest in each and all of the future payments from a particular lottery prize award is to be paid to a single transferee, meaning that a prize

winner choosing to transfer any payments remaining in their deferred prize award must transfer their entire interest in the lottery prize award, and that the prize winner's entire interest in any single prize award may not be transferred to more than one transferee. (emphasis added). { 27} Appellant argues that partial assignments are authorized under R.C. 3770.12(I) because it only reads transferor s interest, not transferor s entire interest. Appellant further argues as support for his position, that R.C. 3770.10, which contains the definitions used in sections 3770.07 and 3770.10 to 3770.14 of the Revised Code, defines transferee as follows { 28} (G) "Transferee" means a party acquiring or proposing to acquire all or any part of a lottery prize award through a transfer. (emphasis added). { 29} Appellant therefore argues that O.A.C. 37701-8-(01(B)(7)(I) is in conflict with R.C. 3770.10(G). { 30} The Lottery Commission argues that R.C. 3770.10(G) contemplates the division of an entire lottery prize award, as in when a group of people buy a single ticket, each of the pool s member s fractional share would be part of the lottery prize award. { 31} An Ohio Administrative Code section is a further arm, extension, or explanation of statutory intent implementing a statute passed by the General Assembly. It has the force and effect of a statute itself. Meyers v. State Lottery Commission (1986) 34 Ohio App. 3d 232.

{ 32} We have reviewed R.C. 3770.12(I) and O.A.C. 37701-8-01(B)(7)(i) and do not find that administrative rule is in conflict with the enabling statute. Having so found, we must give it the force and effect of law. { 33} Appellant s first Assignment of Error is overruled. { 34} The decision of the Knox County Court of Common Pleas is affirmed. By Boggins, J. Gwin, P.J. and Wise, J. concur. JUDGES IN THE COURT OF APPEALSFOR LICKING COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF STATEWIDE FUNDING GROUP, LLC FOR AN ORDER ALLOWING ASSIGNMENT OF LOTTERY WINNINGS OF ALAN J. STONE JUDGMENT ENTRY

CASE NO. 04CA000006 For the reasons stated in our accompanying Memorandum-Opinion on file, the judgment of the Knox County Court of Common Pleas, Probate Division, Knox County, Ohio, is affirmed. Costs assessed to appellant. JUDGES