Potential for a Structured Settlement Industry Shake-Up: The 'Cordero' Appeal
There is an entire industry that has existed in our country for many years where personal injury victims and wrongful death survivors who settled tort cases by way of "structured" settlement (as opposed to an all-at-once lump sum) have sold or assigned their future structured settlement payment rights to third-party purchasers, at high interest rates, for what can end up as mere pennies on the dollar.
March 16, 2023 at 12:15 PM
10 minute read
You can hear the decades-old television jingle and see the motley crew of opera singers as clear as a bell: "I have a structured settlement and I need cash now." For most readers, your knowledge of structured settlements stops there. But there is an entire industry that has existed in our country for many years where personal injury victims and wrongful death survivors who settled tort cases by way of "structured" settlement (as opposed to an all-at-once lump sum) have sold or assigned their future structured settlement payment rights to third-party purchasers, at high interest rates, for what can end up as mere pennies on the dollar.
Lesser known, perhaps, is that for explicit tax purposes, structured settlement annuities are not owned by the tort victims themselves, also known as the "payees." The payees have a right to receive the structured settlement payments as they come due contractually, but they otherwise have no right to annuity ownership under the U.S. Tax Code. Rather, the contracts are, for the most part, subject to "qualified assignment," and are owned and issued by top-rated insurance companies. These insurance companies have the obligation to make the payments, when due, by contract. No annuity contract provides that any payee has any right to assign, or "factor" their payments, yet payees do so by the tens of thousands each year. Although all 50 states now have their own version of a structured settlement protection act (SSPA) that functions as a consumer protection statute for payees, many factoring transactions are approved by courts without much inquiry. Indeed, most state legislatures have not revisited their SSPAs in decades, and many judges often feel as though it is the payee's decision whether to take a financial haircut to get "cash now." Judges have little guidance from their state lawmakers or common law as to what proper inquiry into a structured settlement transfer might even look like.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to asset-and-logo-licensing@alm.com. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllWaiving a Liability Insurer’s Right to Subrogation—Is It Appropriate?
The Growing PFAS Morass: Why Insurance Should Cover These Products Liability Claims
9 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1'It's Not Going to Be Pretty': PayPal, Capital One Face Novel Class Actions Over 'Poaching' Commissions Owed Influencers
- 211th Circuit Rejects Trump's Emergency Request as DOJ Prepares to Release Special Counsel's Final Report
- 3Supreme Court Takes Up Challenge to ACA Task Force
- 4'Tragedy of Unspeakable Proportions:' Could Edison, DWP, Face Lawsuits Over LA Wildfires?
- 5Meta Pulls Plug on DEI Programs
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250