[*1]
Matter of Peachtree Settlement Funding LLC v Allstate Life Ins. Co.
2021 NY Slip Op 50741(U) [72 Misc 3d 1214(A)]
Decided on July 30, 2021
Supreme Court, Washington County
Muller, J.
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.


Decided on July 30, 2021
Supreme Court, Washington County


In the Matter of the Petition of Peachtree Settlement Funding, LLC, Petitioner,

against

Allstate Life Insurance Company, ALLSTATE ASSIGNMENT COMPANY, and MEGAN STALDER, As Interested Persons pursuant to GOL § 5-1701 (c).




EC2021-33046



Napierski, VanDenburgh, Napierski & O'Connor, LLP, Albany (Ryan J. Slattery), for petitioner.

Megan Stalder, Salem, respondent pro se.


Robert J. Muller, J.

Petitioner seeks court approval for the transfer of a periodic payment consistent with the Structured Settlement Protection Act (SSPA) (see General Obligations Law art 5, title 17, General Obligations Law § 5-1701 et seq.).The SSPA, enacted in 2002 (see L 2002, ch 537), was intended to, inter alia, provide a level of protection to structured settlement payees negotiating to sell or transfer a periodic payment to third parties. The statute specifically provides for disclosure with respect to the terms and provisions of the proposed transfer, together with prior judicial approval. The Court initially observes that the parties have complied with General Obligations Law § 5-1705 (c), which requires a copy of the order to show cause and petition to be served upon all interested parties at least twenty (20) days before the time at which the petition is noticed to be heard.

On or about November 15, 2003, Megan Stalder was injured in a motor vehicle accident. She thereafter entered into a Settlement Agreement (hereinafter Agreement) with Allstate Insurance Company which Agreement provides for periodic payments to Ms. Stalder of $1,000.00 per month, "beginning on August 25, 2008 for 20 years guaranteed, then continuing for her life thereafter." The Agreement further provides for "the following guaranteed lump sum payments:

$40,000.00 on August 25, 2008,
$63,551.39 on August 25, 2013,
$85,883.27 on August 25, 2018,
$116,681.38 on August 25, 2023, and
$157,185.83 on August 25, 2028."

The Court notes that four previous applications have been filed to transfer Ms. Stalder's structured settlement rights which the Court finds it worthwhile to publish:

(1) An Order from the Supreme Court of Rensselaer County (Young, J.) — entered on March2, 2015 — which approved a transfer of $60,000 of the $85,883.27 lump sum payment due on August 25, 2018, $80,000.00 of the $116,681.38 lump sum payment due on August 25, 2023 and $27,185.83 of the $157,185.83 payment due on August 25, 2028 — for a total of $167,185.83 — to Allstate Settlement Corporation in exchange for a payment of $92,372.09 to Megan Stalder;

(2) An Order from the Supreme Court of Washington County (Pritzker, J.) — entered on September 28, 2016 — which approved a transfer of $25,883.27 of the $85,883.27 lump sum payment due on August 25, 2018 and $36,681.38 of the $116,681.38 lump sum payment due on August 25, 2023 — for a total of $62,564.65 — to Allstate Settlement Corporation in exchange for a payment of $42,456.37 to Ms. Stalder;

(3) An Order from the Supreme Court of Washington County (Bruening, J.) — entered on November 20, 2017 — which approved a transfer of $50,000.00 of the $157,185.85 payment due on August 25, 2028 to Ms. Stalder for $21,500.00

(4) An Order from the Supreme Court of Washington County (Bruening, J.) — entered on February 10, 2021 — which approved a transfer of $55,000.00 of the $157,185.83 due on August 25, 2028 to RSL Funding, LLC in exchange for a payment of $35,500.00 to Ms. Stalder.

Presently before the Court is a fifth application by Order to Show Cause filed on June 30, 2021. If approved, there will be no further future periodic payments from this settlement. Ms. Stalder now wishes to transfer $25,000.00 which remains of payment due on August 25, 2028 to petitioner for $12,500.00. Ms. Stalder is 37 years old, single and has no minor dependents. She is "currently unemployed, but often assist[s her] partner with business matters for a shared income." According to Ms. Stalder, she plans to use the $12,500.00 as follows:

"I [plan] to create my own small business, selling photography services and private art. I will be able to pay for the creation of a website as well as the necessary marketing to start my business. I estimate this will cost about $6,500.00. In additions [sic], my partner and I plan to purchase a home together within the next year, and the residual funds after starting my business ([a]pproximately $6,000.00) will go towards our down payment and closing costs for our home. . . ."

At the hearing on this petition Ms. Stalder indicated to the Court that she presently has approximately $20,000.00 available to her from the February 10, 2021 Order approving the $35,500.00 transfer. Such funds in her possession already exceed the financial needs described in the instant petition and demonstrate that no financial hardship would occur should this petition be denied.

As observed above, petitioner technically complies with General Obligations Law § 5-1705 by including a copy of the transfer agreement, a copy of the disclosure statement and proof of service upon all interested parties, including the party currently receiving the structured [*2]settlement payments and the obligor responsible for making the payments (see Matter of J.G. Wentworth Originations, LLC [Allstate Life Ins. Co. of N.Y.-Kwant], 61 Misc 3d 1224[A], 2018 NY Slip Op 51730[U], *1 [Sup Ct, Dutchess County 2018]; Matter of 321 Henderson Receivables L.P. v. Martinez, 11 Misc 3d 892, 894-895 [Sup Ct, NY County 2006]).

That being said, in enacting the SSPA the Legislature "' 'did not intend for the courts to be mere rubber stamps' for the proposed sale" (Matter of 321 Henderson Receivables L.P. v. Martinez, 11 Misc 3d at 895, quoting Matter of Settlement Capital Corp. [Ballos], 1 Misc 3d 446, 461 [Sup Ct, Queens County 2003]; accord Matter of J.G. Wentworth Originations, LLC [Allstate Life Ins. Co. of N.Y.-Kwant], 61 Misc 3d 1224[A] at *1). Rather, "the courts are intended to examine the various statutory criteria and determine whether the proposed sale will truly serve the 'best interest' of the payee" (Matter of 321 Henderson Receivables L.P. v. Martinez, 11 Misc 3d at 895; accord Matter of J.G. Wentworth Originations, LLC [Allstate Life Ins. Co. of N.Y.-Kwant], 61 Misc 3d 1224[A] at *1).

When considering the best interest of the payee, "the court must . . . determine whether the transaction, including the discount rate used to determine the gross advance amount and the fees and expenses used to determine the net advance amount, are fair and reasonable" (Matter of J.G. Wentworth Originations, LLC [Allstate Life Ins. Co. of N.Y.-Kwant], 61 Misc 3d 1224[A] at *1; see General Obligations Law § 5-1706 [b]; Matter of 321 Henderson Receivables L.P. v. Martinez, 11 Misc 3d at 894; Matter of Settlement Funding of NY LLC v Solivan, 8 Misc 3d 1006 [A] [Sup Ct, Kings County 2005]). Application of this best interest standard "' 'requires a case-by-case analysis to determine whether the proposed transfer of structured settlement payments, . . . designed to preserve the injured person's long-term financial security, will provide needed financial rescue without jeopardizing or irreparably impairing the financial security afforded to the payee . . .'@ (Matter of Novation Funding LLC v Griffin, 39 Misc 3d 1207(A), 2013 NY Slip Op 50511[U], *4 [Sup Ct, Kings County 2013], quoting Matter of Settlement Capital Corp. [Ballos], 1 Misc 3d at 455).(See also Matter of J.G. Wentworth Originations, LLC v. McDonald, 67 Misc 3d 1239(A), 2020 NY Slip Op 50790(U) [Sup Ct, Warren County 2020];

Considering the history of these several approved applications, together with Ms. Stadler's indication that she has the funds already in her possession to accomplish that which she desires — and the fact that this approval, if granted would extinguish all future structured payments - the Court specifically finds no evidence that denial of the petition shall create a hardship, and that the proposed transfer is not in her best interests.

Therefore, having considered NYSCEF documents 1 through 9, 13 and 14 submitted in support of the petition and oral argument having been held on July 29, 2021 with Ryan J. Slattery, Esq. appearing on behalf of petitioner and Megan Stalder appearing on her own behalf it is hereby

ORDERED that the relief requested is denied in its entirety.

The above constitutes the Decision and Order of the Court.

The original of this Decision and Order has been e-filed by the Court. Counsel for petitioner is hereby directed to promptly obtain a copy of the e-filed Decision and Order for service with notice of entry upon all interested persons pursuant to GOL§ 5-1701(c) and in accordance with CPLR 5513.



Dated:July 30, 2021
Lake George, New York
ROBERT J. MULLER, J.S.C.