Judge: Joseph Lipner, Case: 25STCP00142, Date: 2025-02-27 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 25STCP00142 Hearing Date: February 27, 2025 Dept: 72
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
DEPARTMENT 72
TENTATIVE
RULING
|
IN RE Petition of: J.G. WENTWORTH ORIGINATIONS, LLC, Petitioner, and KENNEDY COLLINS JR., Transferor
and Real Party-In-Interest. |
Case No:
25STCP00142 Hearing Date: February 27, 2025 Calendar Number: 5 |
Petitioner J.G. Wentworth Originations, LLC (“Petitioner”)
requests approval of the transfer of certain structured settlement payment
rights from payee and transferor Kennedy Collins Jr. (“Payee”).
The Court CONTINUES the petition to May 1, 2025 at 8:30 a.m.
Petitioner
must:
(1) Comply
with the full requirements for service by mail (if it intends to effect service
in this manner) by obtaining an acknowledgment of service for parties in
California, or a return receipt for parties outside California;
(2) Provide
Payee’s address;
(3) Serve
all relevant documents – including any notices of increased purchase price – at
least 20 days before the continued hearing date; and
(4) Include
the current proposed purchase agreement – accounting for any increases in
purchase price or other changes – among the documents that are served on the
interested parties and filed with the Court.
Payee entered into a structured settlement agreement in 2023
for a personal injury claim.
Payee seeks to transfer, and Petitioner seeks to obtain, the
rights to 120 payments of $4,233.91 each, beginning on January 19, 2035 and
ending on December 19, 2044. Payee will receive a lump sum of $150,000.00 from
Petitioner in exchange for the transfer.
The annuity issuer is New York Life Insurance Company. The
annuity obligor is New York Life Insurance Company and Annuity Corporation.
Petitioner filed this action on February 28, 2024.
Petitioner filed and served an Amended Petition on March 15, 2024. The Payee
has filed a declaration in support of the petition. No party has filed an opposition.
The court approval process for a transfer of structured
settlement payment rights requires the transferee to file a petition in the
county in which the transferor resides for approval of the transfer. (Ins.
Code, § 10139.5, subd. (f)(1).) In addition, the following elements are
required to be served and filed not less than 20 days prior to the scheduled
hearing on any application for approval of a transfer of structured settlement
payment rights:
A. A copy of the transferee’s current and any
prior petitions.
B. A
copy of the transfer agreement.
C. A
listing of each of the payee’s dependents, together with each dependent's
age.
D. A
copy of the disclosure required in subdivision (b) of section 10136.
E. A
copy of the annuity contract.
F. A
copy of any qualified assignment agreement.
G. A
copy of the underlying structured settlement agreement.
H. Notification
that any interested party is entitled to support, oppose, or otherwise respond
to the transferee’s application, either in person or by counsel, by submitting
written comments to the court or by participating in the hearing.
I. Notification
of the time and place of the hearing and notification of the manner in which
and the time by which written responses to the application must be filed, which
may not be less than 15 days after service of the transferee’s notice, in order
to be considered by the court.
J. If
the payee entered into the structured settlement at issue within five years
prior to the date of the transfer agreement, then the transferee shall provide
notice to the payee’s attorney of record at the time the structured settlement
was created, if the attorney is licensed to practice in California, at the
attorney’s address on file with the State Bar of California. The notice shall
be delivered by regular mail.
K. Proof
of service showing compliance with the notification requirements of this
section.
(Ins. Code, § 10139.5, subd. (e)(2).)
Further, at the time of filing such a petition, the
transferee shall file a copy of the petition with the California Attorney
General. (Ins. Code, § 10139.) Lastly, the court shall retain
continuing jurisdiction to interpret and monitor the implementation of the
transfer agreement as justice requires. (Id., § 10139.5(i).)
This Petition is governed by Insurance Code sections 10134
through 10139.5. (See 321 Henderson Receivables Origination LLC v. Sioteco (2009)
173 Cal.App.4th 1059, 1066.) Under Insurance Code (“Ins. Code”), section 10137,
a transfer of structured settlement payment rights is void unless a court
reviews and approves the transfer and finds the following conditions are
met:
a. The
transfer of the structured settlement payment rights is fair and reasonable and
in the best interest of the payee, taking into account the welfare and support
of his or her dependents.
b. The
transfer complies with the requirements of this article and will not contravene
other applicable law, and the court has reviewed and approved the transfer as
provided in Section 10139.5.
Pursuant to Insurance Code, section 10139.5, subdivision
(a), the Court must make the following express findings as to a transfer of
structured settlement payment rights:
2. The
payee has been advised in writing by the transferee to seek independent
professional advice regarding the transfer and has either received that advice
or knowingly waived receipt of that advice in writing.
3. The
transferee has provided the payee with a disclosure form that complies with
Section 10136 and the transfer agreement complies with Sections 10136 and
10138.
4. The
transfer does not contravene any applicable statute or the order of any court
or other government authority.
5. The
payee reasonably understands the terms of the transfer agreement, including the
terms set forth in the disclosure statement required by Section 10136.
6. The
payee understands and does not wish to exercise the payee's right to cancel the
transfer agreement.
The transfer agreement is effective only upon approval in a
final court order. (Ins. Code, § 10139.5(a).)
There are a number of problems that need to be remedied.
First, Petitioner did not conduct service by mail properly.
Petitioner attempted to conduct service on all of the interested parties by
mail.
To serve process by
mail to a person located in California, the plaintiff must mail by first-class
mail or airmail, postage prepaid, (1) a copy of the summons and the complaint,
(2) two copies of a “Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt of Summons,” and (3)
a return envelope, postage prepaid, addressed to the sender. (Code Civ. Proc.,
§ 415.30, subd. (a).) “Service of a summons pursuant to this section is deemed
complete on the date a written acknowledgment of receipt of summons is
executed, if such acknowledgment thereafter is returned to the sender.” (Code
Civ. Proc., § 415.30, subd. (c).) If the person to be served by mail is outside
California, no acknowledgment notice is required, and a return receipt will
suffice. (Code Civ. Proc., § 415.40.)
Here, Petitioner apparently did not provide a notice and
acknowledgement of receipt of summons or return receipt as to service for any
party.
The annuity issuer, Genworth Life and Annuity Insurance
Company, is located in Virginia, but has an agent for service of process in
California. The annuity obligor, Jamestown Life Insurance Company, is located
in Virginia. Payee declares that they reside in Los Angeles County, California.
(First Amended Collins Decl., ¶ 1.)
Thus, if service is to be effected by mail, acknowledgments
of service will be required for service on the Payee and the annuity issuer of all
of the required documents in this case. Petitioner must similarly provide a
return receipt for service on the annuity obligor of all of the required
documents in this case.
Second, Petitioner has not provided the address of Payee –
including in the proof of service. Payee is a real party in interest in this
action. Thus, the payee’s address should be provided. The Court has previously
admonished this party and this counsel on this issue in other similar actions
for the transfer of payment rights. The Court reiterates its admonition.
Third, each of the documents required to be served on the
Payee and all other interested parties, including the annuity issuer and
annuity obligor, must be served not less than 20 days prior to the hearing. (Ins.
Code, § 10139.5, subd. (e)(2).) Here, Petitioner has filed two notices of
increased purchase price less than 20 days prior to the scheduled hearing – one
on February 10, 2025, and a second on February 24, 2025. Both of these notices
are therefore late, and the hearing will need to be continued.
Fourth, in the second notice of increased purchase price,
Petitioner failed to attach as an exhibit the new purchase agreement, although
it did include the California disclosure statement. Petitioner must include the
purchase agreement in its submission to the Court and serve it on all
interested parties. This, too, must be served more than 20 days before the
continued hearing date.
The
Court continues the petition so that Petitioner may remedy these defects.