Thread by @SheillaDingus

#BREAKING
Third Circuit vacates majority of Judge Brody's ruling prohibiting claim assignments from 3rd party lenders for #NFL Concussion Settlement class members
drive.google.com/file/d/1LAlvUa…

"the District Court went too far in voiding the cash advance
agreements in their entirety and voiding contractual provisions
that went only to a lender’s right to receive funds after the
player acquired them."

I guess no one is immune from typos. This should have been 20,000.

Chris Seeger's warnings to avoid predatory lenders (coupled with his solicitation on behalf of Esquire Bank) helped to invalidate Judge Brody's assertion that claim assignments were in fact prohibited per the settlement agreement.

"The...order did not make factual findings as to any specific agreement or the practices of any specific funding company. Instead...relied on the anti-assignment provision in the settlement agreement and its own role as a fiduciary...bases (sic) for entering the expansive order."

Interesting that the portion of Judge Brody's order that was upheld was due to the fact that Atlas did not appeal her December ruling in a timely manner. #deadlines

Another untimely appeal.

#jurisdiction

"there are circumstances where finality should be given a “practical rather than a technical construction.”

"The issues presented by the December 8, 2017 order are also important because they involve freedom of contract and the authority of the District Court..."

Administrative vs. Substantive
Other decisions in the #NFL settlement are likely to be appealed, and the success of those appeals will hang on the appeals court's view of the challenged rulings.

"We conclude that the District Court retained broad authority to administer the settlement, but that the Court ultimately exceeded its authority in voiding the agreements in their entirety."

"Although the District Court’s retention of jurisdiction applied only to the parties and other related entities expressly set out in the retention provision—and there can be no dispute that the settlement agreement was not binding on nonparties."

"the District Court had the authority to enter purely administrative orders such as the February 20, 2018 order directing the disbursement of funds to class members...the December 8, 2017 order is a bit more complicated...."

"we adopt the District Court’s interpretation & conclude that any true
assignments contained within the cash advance agreements-that is contractual provisions that allowed the lender to step into the shoes of the player and seek funds directly from the settlement fund—were void"

As a side note, I find this portion of the ruling quite interesting since the #NFL settlement's assignment provisions are near identical to assignment clauses in other settlements that have never been interpreted in this way.

"Of course, once the funds are disbursed to the players, the District Court’s power over the funds—and any contracts affecting the funds—is at an end."

"there is no dispute that a loan transaction between a class member and a third party is not prohibited under the terms of the settlement."

In sum...

"We express no opinion as to the ultimate enforceability of any of the cash advance agreements." This likely means that lenders will pursue class members whose awards have been disbursed without payment to the lenders.

Big takeaway:
While the court may order the claims administrator to refrain from disbursing funds to lenders, this does not void the lender's ability to recover funds once they have been distributed to the class member.

Bottom line:

Speaking of typos.
A word from the Commander in "Cheif."

@threadreaderapp unroll