by Structured Settlement Watchdog
Like Ole Man River, the Terrence Taylor structured settlement "10 sales approved in 2 years" factoring case "just keeps rolling along". Steps away from the
Elizabeth River this morning, Judge Charles Maxfield seemed ambitious about getting the Taylor case moving from its languished state with a stack of 25 motions pending; he referred to the long delays as "shameful". But at the end of the hearing, Maxfield's only new ruling was on a long pending motion by Taylor to disqualify Heretick from representing his client 123 Lump Sum. Taylor's camp filed the discovery motion more than 5 years ago because it intended to call Heretick as a witness. At the time Heretick argued ""That Taylor's motion to disqualify Plaintiffs' counsel is simply another dilatory, vexatious effort to district this Court from the essential nature of this case, to-wit, that Terrence Taylor lied deliberately and repeatedly to this Court under oath in seeking to sell his annuity rights in a significant number of transactions, and now, having squandered his assets on prostitutes, gambling, and drugs, seeks to blame everyone but himself for his conduct"
In the process of cleaning up the docket however, Judge Maxfield also:
- let stand a 2015 decisions by recused Judge James Hawks to unseal the Taylor structured settlement transfer petitions in Portsmouth case records. Hawk's ruling was stymied by Heretick's not signing the order and it was never entered. Subsequently Hawks recused himself after he was mentioned in a Wall Street Journal article by journalist Leslie Scism.
- let stand an October 27, 2017 ruling by recused Judge Johnny Morrison, which at the time was after two years of inexplicable delays, giving Terrence Taylor will get his day in court and also permitted New York Life to bring in investors as additional parties and to go forward with its interpleader action, while litigation over the legitimacy of his structured settlement transfers goes forward. The investors are assignees of certain factored structured settlement payment streams originated by 123 Lump Sum and Isettlements from Terrence Taylor's structured settlement
Taylor originally filed suit February 26, 2015 in Eastern Virginia Federal Court, seeking jurisdiction in Alexandria Virginia partly on the basis that the Order of the federal judge in the underlying 1989 personal injury settlement precluded transfers. Defendants played the Rooker Feldman card and the matter was voluntarily dismissed. SAF immediately filed for a Declaratory Judgment action, to which Taylor counterclaimed in March 2015. [ Structured Asset Funding, LLC et al v Terrence E. Taylor Portsmouth Circuit VA Case No. CL15-3022].
Judge Hawks recused himself after he was mentioned in the aforementioned Scism article and the wheels of justice were at a standstill until June 2017 hearings and Judge Johnny Morrison's ruling 4 months later. Then Morrison was recused.
The next hearing is set for December 17, 2021 in which a single motion is to be decided, that of Income Stream Funding Partner's objection to New York Life's interpleader motion. Income Stream Funding Partners LLC was an assignee of some of the payment streams at issue in the case and filed a motion to dismiss the interpleader. Two of the other defendants have already unsuccessfully contested the New York Life interpleader action.
What is interpleader?
A way for a holder of property to initiate a suit between two or more claimants to the property. If, for example, A holds property that he knows he does not own, but that both B and C are claiming, A can sue both B and C in an interpleader action, where B and C could litigate who actually owns the property. [Source: Legal Information Institute]
What is an assignee in a structured settlement factoring transaction?
Under Virginia Law, "Assignee" means a party acquiring or proposing to acquire structured settlement payment rights directly or indirectly from a transferee of such rights
How many motions STILL remain pending in the Terrence Taylor Structured Settlement Factoring Litigation?
24 motions remain pending including a motion to compel discovery that at the time of the December hearing will have been pending for 6 years.