Judge: William A. Crowfoot, Case: 24NNCP00556, Date: 2024-10-29 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24NNCP00556    Hearing Date: October 29, 2024    Dept: 3

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - NORTHEAST DISTRICT

On September 20, 2024, this petition for approval for a transfer of structured settlement payment rights from transferor, Patricia Anderson aka “P.A.” (“Payee”) to M_W_84, LLC (“Petitioner”) was filed. A First Amended Petition was filed on October 14, 2024. Metropolitan Tower Life Insurance Company (“Obligor”) is an insurance company which has a continuing periodic payment obligation to Payee under a structured settlement agreement and Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“Annuity Issuer”) is an insurance company who has issued a contract used to fund the structured settlement payment obligations of the Obligor. 

A direct or indirect transfer of structured settlement payment rights is not effective unless the transfer has been approved by a court order finding:¿¿

(1) The transfer is in the best interest of the payee, considering the welfare and support of the payee’s dependents.¿

(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, in writing, the opportunity to receive the advice. ¿

(3) The transferee has complied with the notification requirements pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (f), 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 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.¿¿

(Ins. Code § 10139.5(a).)¿

          Payee, who is divorced and has no dependents, has agreed to sell Petitioner future payments from a structured settlement totaling $296,738 in exchange for $100,000. (Amended Petition, Ex. A.) Payee declares she is currently a self-employed chef and is currently facing a financial hardship. (Amended Petition, Ex. H, Anderson Decl., ¶ 3.) She has agreed to sell a portion of her interests in her structured settlement agreement to reduce that hardship. (Ibid.) Payee states that she believes the funds are necessary in order to purchase a prefabricated home near Edwards, California in Kern County, which will make her living situation more affordable. (Amended Petition, Ex. H, ¶ 7.) She has previously filed other transfer petitions from 2009 to 2023. (Id., ¶ 8.) She states that this transfer is the only financial option available to her and that Petitioner’s offer was the best available. (Id., ¶ 6.) She considers the interest rate of 13.97% to be fair since the majority of payments that she is transferring is contingent upon her being alive and are not guaranteed to be paid out. (Ibid.)

It does not appear that Petitioner has complied with the notice provisions required by Insurance Code section 10139.5. Pursuant to Insurance Code section 10134, the term “interested parties” means, “the payee, the payee's attorney, any beneficiary irrevocably designated under the annuity contract to receive payments following the payee's death, the annuity issuer, the structured settlement obligor, and any other party who has continuing rights or obligations under the structured settlement agreement”

          The settlement agreement provides that if Payee dies before April 29, 2036, the remaining guaranteed periodic payments shall be made to Natasha Wright, Lekeisha Wright, Omar Washington, Patricia Manning, Rita Mayweather, Joshua Morrow, and Terry Morrow. (Amended Petition, Ex. G, p. 12.) None of these seven individuals are identified in the proof of service for the Amended Petition. Only Payee, Obligor, and Annuity Issuer were served with the Amended Petition. Therefore, it does not appear that Petitioner has given notice as required to all interested parties. (Insurance Code, § 10139.5, (f)(2).)

          Accordingly, the petition is DENIED without prejudice.

Dated this 29th day of October, 2024

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at ALHDEPT3@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org. Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the matter. Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue. If the Court does not receive emails from the parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.