Matter of Peachtree Settlement Funding v. Morgan

Consumer Protection

New York Law Journal


Justice Thomas Feinman

Peachtree Settlement Funding sought approval for a transfer of structured settlement payments from payee Morgan. An Infant's Compromise Order was entered in September 2003 settling a lawsuit brought on then-infant Morgan's behalf. The instant application called for a lump sump payment of $250,000 to Morgan in exchange for an aggregate of monthly payments totaling $720,235.64. The court noted a prior transfer was approved in November 2011 of an aggregate amount of over $40,000. The court concluded that an aggregate amount of payments of over $720,000 for an immediate lump sum of $250,000, totaling only 39.5 percent of the discounted present value of $632,262.03 was neither fair, nor reasonable. The court stated that Morgan's "ambitious, yet inchoate plans" of buying several real estate properties was speculative and risky, ruling such plans were exactly what the Structured Settlement Protection Act (SSPA) sought to protect payee's from. The court stated the petition could not be determined on the submitted papers, finding the proposed transfer did not meet the best interest requirement or the fair and reasonable requirement under the SSPA. Accordingly, the court denied the motion and dismissed the petition.

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article# 1202587455245

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.