Transfer of Structured Settlement Payment Rights Ex Rel. Saucier v. Saucier
2016 Miss. App. LEXIS 801
| Miss. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- RSL Funding LLC (RSL) purchased structured-settlement payments from Benny Saucier; the transfer was later set aside under the Mississippi Structured Settlement Protection Act (MSSPA).
- The chancery court found the transfer unenforceable and indicated RSL might be entitled to damages but never awarded them because no damages pleading had been filed.
- On appeal in Saucier I, this Court affirmed the denial of arbitration and remanded the case to the chancery court to determine damages.
- After remand, the chancery court concluded RSL had never timely pled a damages claim and entered final judgment for Saucier; RSL moved to amend in 2015 to assert a damages complaint, which the court denied.
- The chancery court held the amendment was barred by the three-year statute of limitations (Miss. Code Ann. § 15-1-49) because RSL’s damages accrued in 2009 and its leave-to-amend motion was filed in 2015.
- RSL appealed, arguing its 2009 motion to reconsider and other filings sufficiently pled damages; the majority rejected that argument and affirmed the chancery court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (RSL) | Defendant's Argument (Saucier) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether RSL sufficiently pled a damages claim | RSL: its Sept. 18, 2009 motion to reconsider (and related filings) put damages at issue and functioned as a pleading | Saucier: motions are not pleadings under M.R.C.P. 7; no pleading demanded damages | Court: Motions are not pleadings; Rule 8 requires a demand for judgment; RSL never pled damages — held for Saucier |
| Whether the chancery court erred by entering final judgment for Saucier | RSL: remand required damages determination; prior orders recognized RSL’s right to damages | Saucier: final judgment proper because no pleading sought monetary relief as required by Rule 8 and Rule 54(c) | Court: Final judgment proper because no pleadings sought monetary relief; Rule 54(c) bars award beyond pleadings |
| Whether RSL’s 2015 motion for leave to amend should have been granted | RSL: should be allowed to amend to assert damages | Saucier: statute of limitations bars the proposed amendment; denial within chancellor’s discretion | Court: Denial affirmed — amendment barred by three-year statute of limitations |
| Whether prior proceedings/filings tried damages by consent under Rule 15(b) (dissent’s point) | RSL/dissent: issues of damages were litigated and raised by motions and orders; tried by consent | Saucier/majority: procedural rules require a pleading and a demand for judgment; motions/orders informing of a right do not substitute for a pleading | Court (majority): Did not adopt Rule 15(b) treatment here; majority affirms dismissal for failure to plead; dissent would remand |
Key Cases Cited
- Madison Cty. v. Hopkins, 857 So.2d 43 (Miss. 2003) (standard of appellate review for chancery findings)
- In re Estate of Johnson, 735 So.2d 231 (Miss. 1999) (chancellor’s factual findings reviewed for manifest error)
- Estate of Stevens v. Wetzel, 762 So.2d 293 (Miss. 2000) (notice pleading requires placing opponent on notice of claims)
- Moeller v. Am. Guar. & Liab. Ins., 812 So.2d 953 (Miss. 2002) (leave to amend and futility standard)
- Giles v. Stokes, 988 So.2d 926 (Miss. Ct. App. 2008) (abuse of discretion standard for denying leave to amend)
- Saucier v. RSL Funding LLC (Saucier I), 130 So.3d 1108 (Miss. Ct. App. 2013) (prior appeal affirming denial to compel arbitration and remanding for damages)
- Sawyers v. Herrin-Gear Chevrolet Co., 26 So.3d 1026 (Miss. 2010) (appellate jurisdiction over final decisions on arbitration)
- Subway Equip. Leasing Corp. v. Forte, 169 F.3d 324 (5th Cir. 1999) (strong presumption against waiver of arbitration)
- Miller Brewing Co. v. Fort Worth Distrib. Co., 781 F.2d 494 (5th Cir. 1986) (waiver of arbitration requires affirmative acts inconsistent with arbitration right)