Ex parte Scoggins
| Decision Date | 03 September 2021 |
| Docket Number | 1200103,1200107,1200104,1200106,1200105,1200102 |
| Parties | Ex parte Michael Todd Scoggins and Matthew Tyler-Crimson Scoggins v. Stephen J. Bailey et al. In re: Michael Todd Scoggins and Matthew Tyler-Crimson Scoggins Ex parte Michael Todd Scoggins and Matthew Tyler-Crimson Scoggins In re: Stratcap Investments, Inc. v. Michael Thomas Scoggins, as special conservator for the estates of Michael Todd Scoggins and Matthew Tyler-Crimson Scoggins, minors Ex parte Michael Todd Scoggins and Matthew Tyler-Crimson Scoggins In re: Michael Thomas Scoggins, as administrator of the estate of George Thomas Scoggins, deceased v. Bobby Blankenship et al. |
| Court | Supreme Court of Alabama |
(Calhoun Circuit Court, CV-19-900730, CV-12-900098 CV-12-900099, CV-12-900100, and CV-12-900101, CV-98-996)
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
Before us are petitions for writs of mandamus in six cases with interrelated facts and parties. The petitioners in each of the cases are brothers Michael Todd Scoggins and Matthew Tyler-Crimson Scoggins (sometimes collectively referred to as "the brothers"). The brothers seek to set aside orders in some of the cases, to intervene in some of the cases, and to order the Calhoun Circuit Court to permit the interpleader of funds by a third party in one case. As this opinion details, we grant two of the petitions and deny four of them.
The procedural history in these cases is complex, but a thorough understanding of it is necessary to our disposition of the petitions before us. The petitions involve five interrelated phases of litigation. The first phase of litigation concerned a wrongful-death action initiated in 1998 in the Calhoun Circuit Court because of the untimely death of the brothers' father, an action which was settled in 2002. The second phase of litigation began in 2010 when two petitions were filed in the Calhoun Probate Court seeking to have a "special conservator" appointed to the minor estate of each brother for the purpose of "reopening" the wrongful-death action, and that phase of litigation continued in the Calhoun Circuit Court the same year. The third phase of litigation began in 2012 when four petitions were filed in the Calhoun Circuit Court pursuant to the Alabama Structured Settlement Protection Act ("the ASSPA"), Ala. Code 1975, § 6-11-50 et seq., seeking permission to transfer the structured-settlement-payment rights for some annuities that were created as a result of the settlement of the wrongful-death action. The fourth phase of litigation began in 2019 when the brothers, now past the age of majority, filed what they styled an "emergency motion" in the wrongful-death action that led to a hearing and an order from the Calhoun Circuit Court. The fifth phase of litigation also began in 2019 when the brothers initiated a new action in the Calhoun Circuit Court against entities involved in the previous phases of litigation. Again, a detailed recitation of each phase is necessary to understand our disposition of the mandamus petitions.
On October 28, 1998, the brothers' father, George Thomas Scoggins ("George"), was killed in an industrial accident while working for Barbour Threads, Inc. At that time, Michael and Matthew were five and three years old, respectively. The brothers' paternal grandfather, Michael Thomas Scoggins ("Thomas"), was appointed administrator of George's estate because George previously had divorced the brothers' mother, Jerri Pounds Scoggins.[1] On November 4, 1998, Thomas, as the personal representative of George's estate, commenced a wrongful-death action in the Calhoun Circuit Court against Gaston County Dyeing Machine Company, International Dyeing Equipment Company, Inc., Bobby Blankenship, and Barbour Threads, Inc. Michael and Matthew were represented by guardians ad litem in the wrongful-death action. The wrongful-death action was overseen by circuit judge Sam Monk.
In the spring of 2002, the parties engaged in settlement negotiations. On May 3, 2002, Thomas filed a petition for a hearing regarding a potential pro ami settlement.[2] On May 21, 2002, the circuit court entered an order stating:
On May 30, 2002, a "Settlement Agreement and Release" was executed between Thomas and the remaining various defendants ("the structured settlement").[3] The structured-settlement amount totaled approximately $2, 775, 000, which, after deducting attorney fees and expenses, totaled $1, 490, 914.99. Under the terms of the structured settlement, that money was to be used to purchase four annuities -- two each in Michael's and Matthew's names. Two of the annuities would be purchased from American General Insurance Company, which assigned its future obligation for payment to American General Annuity Service Corporation (the American General entities are collectively referred to as "American General"). Two of the annuities would be purchased from Mass. Mutual Insurance Company, which assigned its future obligation for payment to MassMutual Assignment Company (the Mass. Mutual entities are collectively referred to as "MassMutual"). The annuities provided for periodic payments and lump-sum payments on various dates. More specifically, the structured settlement designated the annuity payments to unfold as follows:
For Michael, from MassMutual:
For Michael, from American General:
For Matthew, from MassMutual:
For Matthew, from American General:
The structured settlement dictated that the monthly payments of $125 for each brother from the annuities were to be made to Jerri, the brothers' mother and natural guardian. Annuity payments starting on November 1, 2010, were to be paid to the "Legal Conservator of the Estate of Michael Todd Scoggins" and to the "Legal Conservator of the Estate of Matthew Tyler-Crimson Scoggins"; no legal conservators for the brothers' estates had been appointed at the time the structured settlement was executed. Payments after Michael and Matthew each reached the age of majority were to be made to Michael and Matthew directly.[4] The structured settlement contained a nonassignment provision concerning the annuity payments that provided:
"Plaintiffs[5] acknowledge that the Periodic Payments cannot be accelerated, deferred, increased or decreased by Plaintiff or any Payee;[6] nor shall Plaintiff or any Payee have the power to sell, mortgage, encumber, or anticipate the Periodic Payments, or any part thereof, by assignment or otherwise; any attempted transaction in violation of any of these restrictions shall be invalid and void."
On July 19, 2002, a joint stipulation of dismissal of the wrongful-death action was filed in the circuit court. The annuities were purchased after the execution of the structured settlement.
In March 2010, Thomas, through attorney Stephen J. Bailey, filed two petitions in the Calhoun Probate Court styled: "In re: Estate of Matthew Tyler-Crimson Scoggins, a Minor," and "In re: Estate of Michael Todd Scoggins, a Minor." The petitions sought to have Thomas named conservator for the brothers in order to "reopen" the wrongful-death action for the purpose of obtaining a ruling that a sale of the structured-settlement-payment rights was in the best interests of Michael and Matthew. Even though Thomas had sought powers as general conservator for the brothers, [7] in the two identical orders the probate court entered on the petitions on April 20, 2010, Thomas was limited to the role of "special conservator" for a specific purpose.
To continue reading
Request your trial