Settlement Funding, LLC v. Brenston
998 N.E.2d 111
Ill. App. Ct.2013Background
- Brenston filed petitions to vacate void transfer orders approving the transfer of her structured settlement payments to Settlement Funding.
- The underlying settlement contained explicit antiassignment provisions prohibiting Brenston from assigning payments.
- Settlement Funding filed two petitions (07-CH-451 and 08-CH-329) in Sangamon County seeking approval under the Structured Settlement Protection Act, attaching selective documents and omitting the underlying settlement and certain agreements.
- The trial court approved transfers in 2007 and 2008 after no proper service or appearances by Brenston or others.
- Brenston later argued the orders were void ab initio due to fraud and the antiassignment clauses, and sought to void them under 2-1401; the court dismissed as time-barred.
- On appeal, the court held that the transfers were procured by fraud, the antiassignment clause barred the transfers, and the orders were void ab initio; remanded to grant 2-1401 petitions and declare the orders void, with equitable relief to restore Brenston.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the 2-1401 petitions were timely | Brenston argues orders were void ab initio and not time-barred. | Settlement Funding argues two-year time bar applies. | Timeliness resolved in Brenston's favor; voidness controls. |
| Whether the transfer orders were void ab initio for fraud | Brenston contends fraud prevented valid adjudication. | Settlement Funding asserts compliance with the SS Act and fact pattern. | Orders void ab initio due to fraud on the court. |
| Whether antiassignment clauses invalidate the transfers under the Act | Antiassignment clause renders transfers unenforceable and voidable. | Act permits transfers despite private contract terms if statutory requirements are met. | Act does not apply; antiassignment provisions enforceable; court lacked authority. |
| Whether the petition should have been brought in the proper county | Petitions filed in Sangamon County; underlying action in Cook County. | SSPA venue requirements satisfied for the petition. | Procedural defect acknowledged; remand and relief follow from void orders. |
Key Cases Cited
- Sarkissian v. Chicago Board of Education, 201 Ill. 2d 95 (Ill. 2002) (voidness exception to 2-1401 applies)
- In re Shaffer, 319 Ill. App. 3d 1048 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001) (antiassignment provisions protected by Act)
- Nitz v. Shaffer, 317 Ill. App. 3d 119 (Ill. App. Ct. 2000) (antiassignment provisions enforceable under Act)
- E.L. v. Adoption of E.L., 315 Ill. App. 3d 137 (Ill. App. Ct. 2000) (fraud precluding jurisdiction renders void judgment)
- Henderson v. Roadway Express, 308 Ill. App. 3d 546 (Ill. App. Ct. 1999) (fraud and process integrity concerns in judgments)