Can An Assignment of Structured Settlement Payments Be Approved If the Settlement Agreement Has An Antiassignment Provision ?
In Henderson v. Roadway Express, 308 Ill. App. 3d 546, 242 Ill. Dec. 153, 720 N.E.2d 1108 (1999), the Fourth District Appellate Court affirmed the Circuit Court of Vermilion County's decision denying a request for an approval of an assignment of structured settlement payments under section 155.34.
In Henderson, the plaintiff attempted to assign some of the future settlement payments for an immediate, discounted lump-sum payment. See Henderson, 308 Ill. App. 3d at 547.
The settlement agreement in Henderson had an anti assignment provision that clearly and unambiguously prohibited the plaintiff from assigning any of his periodic payments. See Henderson, 308 Ill. App. 3d at 547. the circuit court in Henderson ruled that the settlement agreement "clearly and unambiguously prohibited the parties from assigning any of the periodic payments," and the court therefore refused to approve the plaintiffs assignment. Henderson, 308 Ill. App. 3d at 548.
On appeal, the Fourth District Appellate Court addressed a "barrage" of arguments raised by the plaintiff. Henderson, 308 Ill. App. 3d at 548.
Eventually, it agreed with the circuit court that the antiassignment provision in the settlement agreement "very clearly forbids the plaintiff from assigning his periodic payments." Henderson, 308 Ill. App. 3d at 552.
The appellate court further held that the provision was bargained for and that the plaintiff provided no persuasive authority to justify why the court should ignore the parties' clear intentions to incorporate this bargained-for provision into the settlement agreement. Henderson, 308 Ill. App. 3d at 552.
The circuit court's refusal to approve the assignment was therefore affirmed.