California Court of Appeal

In an action involving the transfer of structured settlement payments, trial court judgment is reversed where: 1) trial court erred in denying plaintiff's Structured Settlement Transfer Act petitions as the anti-assignment provisions in the settlement agreement do not bar transfers of structured settlement payment rights where no interested parties have objected; 2) a conclusion that the petitions must be denied because the transfers would violate the prohibition on usury found in California's Constitution was in error as the transfer of structured settlement payment rights under the Act is not a loan secured by assignment of periodic payments but is a sale of certain rights to receive periodic payments; and 3) many of the trial court's factual findings and legal conclusions on the issue of whether the payees received independent professional advice were erroneous.

Appellate Information

• Decided 05/06/2009
• Published 05/06/2009

Judges

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Reed Smith, Margaret M. Grignon, Wendy S. Albers and Zareh Jaltorossian, Los Angeles;  McCormick Barstow, James P. Wagoner and Todd W. Baxter, Fresno, for Plaintiff and Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• No appearance on behalf of Defendants and Respondents.