The Florida Senate
BILL ANALYSIS AND FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT
(This document is based on the provisions contained in the legislation as of the latest date listed below.)
Prepared By: The Professional Staff of the Committee on Rules
BILL: CS/SB 1526
INTRODUCER: Banking and Insurance Committee and Senator Boyd
SUBJECT: Public Records/Annuity Contract Payees
DATE: February 14, 2022 REVISED:
ANALYST STAFF DIRECTOR REFERENCE ACTION
1. Schrader Knudson BI Fav/CS
2. Bond Cibula JU Favorable
3. Schrader Phelps RC Favorable
Please see Section IX. for Additional Information:
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE - Substantial Changes
I. Summary:
SB 1526 creates a public records exemption for the personal identifying information and annuity
contract numbers of a payee of a structured settlement, and the names of family members,
dependents, and beneficiaries of such payee, contained within a court file relating to a
proceeding for the approval of the transfer of structured settlement payment rights. Such records
are exempt until six months after a final judgment is entered on the transfer application.
The bill has an effective date of July 1, 2022.
II. Present Situation:
Structured Settlements
A structured settlement is an agreement for the periodic payment of damages for personal
injuries, the payments of which are established by a settlement or judgment in resolution of a tort
claim.1 This arrangement typically involves one party paying a lump-sum premium to an
insurance company to purchase an annuity in the name of the injured victim (the payee). Once
the annuity is purchased, the insurance company begins to make periodic payments to the payee
for a negotiated period of time.
1
See s. 626.99296(2)(m), F.S.
BILL: CS/SB 1526 Page 2
Instead of making the payments itself, the insurance company may instead decide to assign its
payment obligations to a structured settlement company. In exchange for accepting its new
payment obligations, the structured settlement company typically receives from the insurance
company a lump-sum payment equivalent to the present value of the future payments that are
owed to the payee.2 In order to obtain the necessary liquidity to make its newly-obligated
periodic payments, the structured settlement company may use this lump-sum to purchase an
annuity from a life insurance company.3
After the establishment of a structured settlement, the payee’s financial circumstances may
change. For example, the payee’s periodic payments may be insufficient to pay for an
immediate, large financial need, or the payee may see the benefit of a one-time cash infusion to
alleviate an incurred obligation. As such, instead of receiving payments under a structured
settlement plan, the payee may wish to transfer his or her rights to payments to another
organization—known as a transferee—in exchange for a lump sum payout of all or part of the
structured settlement. In 2001, the Legislature created s. 626.99296, F.S., to protect recipients of
structured settlements during the transfer process.4 Fundamentally, the statute requires such
transfers to receive prior court approval.5 This approval must be conditioned upon statutorily-
enumerated factors, including the payee establishing that the transfer is in their own best
interests—taking into account the welfare and support of the payee’s dependents.6
The transferee contracting to receive structured settlement rights must, at least 20 days before the
scheduled hearing on an application for such a transfer, file with the court (and provide to all
interested parties) a notice of the proposed transfer and the application for its authorization.7
Interested parties in this circumstance includes:
 The payee;
 The current party obligated to make continuing periodic payments to the payee;
 An insurer that has issued an annuity contract to be used to fund these periodic payments;
 Any beneficiary irrevocably designated under said annuity contract to receive payments
following the payee’s death (or, if such designated beneficiary is a minor, the designated
beneficiary’s parent or guardian); and
 Any other party to the structured settlement who has continuing rights or obligations to
receive or make payments pursuant to said settlement.
The notice must include:
 A copy of the transferee’s application to the court;
 A copy of the transfer agreement;
 A copy of the required disclosure statement that was provided to the payee;
2
Gregg D. Polsky and Brant J. Hellwig, Taxing Structured Settlements, 51 B.C. L. REV. 39, 41-2 (January 2010).
3
Id.
4
Section 626.99296, F.S.
5
Id. at subsection (3); and Rapid Settlements, Ltd. v. Dickerson, 941 So. 2d 1275, 1276-77 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (affirming
lower court decision to deny petition, noting that “[t]ransfers of structured settlement rights are regulated by statute and court
approval is required before a transfer may go forward.”)
6
Section 626.99296(3), F.S.
7
Id. at (4).
BILL: CS/SB 1526 Page 3
 A statement that interested parties may support, oppose, or otherwise respond to the
transferee’s application, in person or by counsel, by submitting written comments to the court
or by participating in the upcoming hearing; and
 The time and place of the hearing and the manner in which, and the time by which, a written
response to the application must be filed in order to be considered by the court.
2016 Revisions to Structured Settlement Law
In 2016, the Legislature revised s. 626.99296, F.S., for the purpose of improving the protection
of recipients of structured settlements. As part of these revisions, s. 626.99296, F.S., expanded
the information that must be provided to the court about the payee in a transfer application. This
information includes:8
 The payee’s name, age, and county of domicile and the number and ages of the payee’s
dependents;
 A copy of the transfer agreement;
 A copy of the required disclosure statement that was provided to the payee;
 An explanation of reasons as to why the payee is seeking approval of the proposed transfer;
and
 A summary of each of the following:
o Any transfers by the payee to the transferee or an affiliate, or through the transferee or an
affiliate to an assignee, within the 4 years preceding the date of the transfer agreement.
o Any transfers within the 3 years preceding the date of the transfer agreement made by the
payee to any person or entity other than the transferee or an affiliate, or an assignee of a
transferee or an affiliate, to the extent such transfers were disclosed to the transferee by
the payee in writing or are otherwise actually known by the transferee.
o Any proposed transfers by the payee to the transferee or an affiliate, or through the
transferee or an affiliate to an assignee, for which an application was denied within the
2 years preceding the date of the transfer agreement.
o Any proposed transfers by the payee to any person or entity other than the transferee, or
an assignee of a transferee or an affiliate, to the extent such proposed transfers were
disclosed to the transferee by the payee in writing or are otherwise actually known by the
transferee, for which applications were denied within the year preceding the date of the
transfer agreement.
Structured Settlement Transfer Fraud
The large amount of personal and financial information about the payee, and, potentially,
information about the payee’s dependents, that must be submitted to a court to approve a
structured settlement transfer may increase the risk of such persons being targeted by fraud
relating to the transfer. The potential for such fraud, and the incentives for fraud, is increased by
the revelation that:
 The payee potentially has a substantial sum of money due to him or her, with the specified
amount due to them contained within the transfer agreement submitted to the court;
8
Id. at (4)(d).
BILL: CS/SB 1526 Page 4
 The payee may be experiencing a financial hardship and have an immediate need for funds
(s. 626.99296(4)(d), F.S., requires the submission of an explanation of reasons as to why the
payee is seeking approval of the proposed transfer);9
 The payee may have recently experienced a serious negative life event, such as a serious
injury or the death or serious injury of a loved one, (which could be the reason for the tort
claim that gave rise to the structured settlement to begin with);10 and
 A transfer of funds is imminent.
Fraudulent actors, and other companies engaging in misleading marketing tactics, are able to
search court records looking for orders and other information relating to the transfer of a
structured settlement. Using the substantial publicly available information, such a person can
approach a payee with a customized solicitation via mail, email, text message, or other medium,
that appears to be from a legitimate source (such as a court official or representative of the
transferee). The person can then engage with the payee and obtain all, or a portion of, that payees
structured settlement through fraud or deceit.
Access to Public Records - Generally
The Florida Constitution provides that the public has the right to inspect or copy records made or
received in connection with official governmental business.11 The right to inspect or copy applies
to the official business of any public body, officer, or employee of the state, including all three
branches of state government, local governmental entities, and any person acting on behalf of the
government.12
Additional requirements and exemptions related to public records are found in various statutes
and rules, depending on the branch of government involved. For instance, s. 11.0431, F.S.,
provides public access requirements for legislative records. Relevant exemptions are codified in
s. 11.0431(2)-(3), F.S., and adopted in the rules of each house of the Legislature.13 Florida Rule
of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.420 governs public access to judicial branch
records.14 Lastly, chapter 119, F.S., known as the Public Records Act, provides requirements for
public records held by executive agencies.
9
Persons having significant debt concerns, experiencing job loss, or having had a negative change in financial status are more
likely to be victims of fraud. See: Federal Trade Commission, Consumer Fraud in the United States (March 2013), available
at: https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/reports/consumer-fraud-united-states-2011-third-ftc-
survey/130419fraudsurvey_0.pdf, and D Shadel, K Pak & J Sauer 2014, Caught in the scammer’s net: Risk factors that may
lead to becoming an internet fraud victim, AARP RESEARCH (2014), available at:
https://www.aarp.org/content/dam/aarp/research/surveys_statistics/econ/2014/Caught-Scammer-Net-
Indiana.doi.10.26419%252Fres.00076.007.pdf.
10
Persons having experienced recent serious negative life events, such as a serious injury or the death or serious injury of a
loved one, are more likely to be victims of fraud. Id.
11
FLA. CONST. art. I, s. 24(a).
12
Id.
13
See Rule 1.48, Rules and Manual of the Florida Senate, (2018-2020) and Rule 14.1, Rules of the Florida House of
Representatives, Edition 2, (2018-2020)
14
State v. Wooten, 260 So. 3d 1060 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018).
BILL: CS/SB 1526 Page 5
The Legislature may exempt public records from public access requirements by passing a
general law by a two-thirds vote of both the House and the Senate.15 The exemption must state
with specificity the public necessity justifying the exemption and must be no broader than
necessary to accomplish the stated purpose of the exemption.16
General exemptions from the public records requirements are contained in the Public Records
Act.17 Specific exemptions often are placed in the substantive statutes relating to a particular
agency or program.18
When creating a public records exemption, the Legislature may provide that a record is “exempt”
or “confidential and exempt.” There is a difference between records the Legislature has
determined to be exempt from the Public Records Act and those which the Legislature has
determined to be exempt from the Public Records Act and confidential.19 Records designated as
“confidential and exempt” are not subject to inspection by the public and may only be released
under the circumstances defined by statute.20 Records designated as “exempt” may be released at
the discretion of the records custodian under certain circumstances.21
Open Government Sunset Review Act
The provisions of s. 119.15, F.S., known as the Open Government Sunset Review Act22 (the
Act), prescribe a legislative review process for newly created or substantially amended 23 public
records or open meetings exemptions, with specified exceptions.24 The Act does not apply to an
exemption that applies solely to the State Court System.25
Public Records and the Judicial Branch
In Locke v. Hawkes, 595 So. 2d 32, at 36-37 (Fla. 1992), the Florida Supreme Court found that
the Legislature, and its members, are not an “agency” as specified in the Public Records Act.
Thus, the Public Records Act would not apply to records of the Legislature. Further, looking at
the history of the legislation, the court found that if the Legislature intended to include itself
15
FLA. CONST. art. I, s. 24(c).
16
Id. See, e.g., Halifax Hosp. Medical Center v. News-Journal Corp., 724 So. 2d 567 (Fla. 1999) (holding that a public
meetings exemption was unconstitutional because the statement of public necessity did not define important terms and did
not justify the breadth of the exemption); Baker County Press, Inc. v. Baker County Medical Services, Inc., 870 So. 2d 189
(Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (holding that a statutory provision written to bring another party within an existing public records
exemption is unconstitutional without a public necessity statement).
17
See, e.g., s. 119.071(1)(a), F.S. (exempting from public disclosure examination questions and answer sheets of
examinations administered by a governmental agency for the purpose of licensure).
18
See, e.g., s. 213.053(2)(a), F.S. (exempting from public disclosure information contained in tax returns received by the
Department of Revenue).
19
WFTV, Inc. v. The Sch. Bd. of Seminole County, 874 So. 2d 48, 53 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004).
20
Id.
21
Williams v. City of Minneola, 575 So. 2d 683 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991).
22
Section 119.15, F.S.
23
An exemption is considered to be substantially amended if it is expanded to include more records or information or to
include meetings as well as records. Section 119.15(4)(b), F.S.
24
Section 119.15(2)(a) and (b), F.S., provides that exemptions required by federal law or applicable solely to the Legislature
or the State Court System are not subject to the Open Government Sunset Review Act.
25
Section 119.15(2)(b), F.S.
BILL: CS/SB 1526 Page 6
within the definition of ch. 119, F.S., it would have done so (but it did not).26 Instead, the court
found that the Public Records Act only applied to “executive branch agencies and their officers
and to local governmental entities and their officers;” entities over which the Legislature has
some means of control. As a coequal branch of government, the judicial branch “is not an
‘agency’ subject to the supervision or control by another coequal branch of government.”27
Similarly, as with similar reasoning used regarding the Legislature in Locke, the Public Records
Act would not also apply to judicial records.28
However, the judicial branch is required to maintain access to public records pursuant to
article 1, section 24(a) of the Florida Constitution.29 To meet its constitutional obligation, the
judicial branch adopted Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.420
entitled “Public Access