Anti-Assignment Clause

38 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Mspa Claims 1, LLC v. Tenet Fla., Inc.
  918 F.3d 1312· 11th Cir.· 2019-03-18 ·cited 66×
  The Eleventh Circuit held that the private cause of action under the Medicare Secondary Payer Act is limited to suits against primary plans, not medical providers, and therefore MSPA lacked a plausible claim.
• In re Spong v. Spong
  661 F.2d 6· 2d Cir.· 1981-09-25 ·cited 28×
  The court held that a debt for attorney's fees awarded in a divorce decree is not excepted from discharge as alimony under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).
• Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Bank OF Boulder
  911 F.2d 1466· 10th Cir.· 1990-08-20 ·cited 23×
• In re Kincaid v. Watson
  917 F.2d 1162· 9th Cir.· 1990-10-25 ·cited 14×
  The concurring judge expresses doubt that a debtor's interest in an ERISA-qualified pension plan is property of the bankruptcy estate, arguing ERISA's restrictions should be considered 'applicable nonbankruptcy law' under 11 U.S.C. § 541(c)(2).
• Kohl v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield OF Fla., Inc.
  955 So. 2d 1140· Fla. 4th DCA· 2007-03-21 ·cited 10×
  A chiropractor challenged an anti-assignment of benefits clause in a health insurance policy, arguing it was unenforceable and ambiguous. The court held that the policy provision clearly and unambiguously prohibited assignment of benefits to non-participating providers and was en
• Hermann Hosp. v. Meba Medical AND Benefits Plan
  959 F.2d 569· 5th Cir.· 1992-04-29 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the document signed by the patient was a valid assignment of benefits to the hospital, and that the plan's anti-assignment clause was either estopped or inapplicable to a healthcare provider assignee. The court also held that the state law claims were preempte
• Aldana v. Colonial Palms Plaza, Ltd.
  591 So. 2d 953· Fla. 3d DCA· 1991-10-29 ·cited 10×
  A lease provision prohibiting assignment of the lease does not bar the assignment of the right to receive payments due under the lease, absent specific language to the contrary.
• Imperial Enters., Inc. v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co.
  535 F.2d 287· 5th Cir.· 1976-07-14 ·cited 10×
  A statutory merger that transfers an insurance policy to the surviving corporation does not violate a no-assignment clause if it does not increase the risk or hazard to the insurer.
• Sargent v. Johnson
  551 F.2d 221· 8th Cir.· 1977-03-16 ·cited 9×
  An insured's unilateral discharge of defense counsel and settlement without insurer consent, after the insurer provided a defense and disputed coverage amounts, constitutes a breach of the insurance policy, relieving the insurer of liability for the settlement.
• Emergency Servs. 24, Inc. v. United Prop. & Cas. INS. Co.
  165 So. 3d 756· Fla. 4th DCA· 2015-05-20 ·cited 7×
  Emergency Services 24 appealed a summary judgment dismissing its breach of contract claim against United Property & Casualty Insurance Company regarding an alleged assignment of homeowner's policy rights. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that an anti-assignme
• In re Buren v. The Soc. Sec. Admin.
  725 F.2d 1080· 6th Cir.· 1984-01-23 ·cited 6×
  The Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 did not repeal by implication the anti-assignment provision of the Social Security Act of 1935, meaning social security benefits cannot be compelled to be paid to a bankruptcy trustee.
• Brannigan v. Anthem Ins. Cos., Inc.
  2019 WL 5393817· M.D. Fla.· 2019-10-10 ·cited 4×
  The court granted the motion to dismiss because the plaintiff failed to establish statutory standing and failed to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6).
• McDANNELL v. United States Off. OF Pers. Mgmt.
  716 F.2d 1063· 5th Cir.· 1983-10-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the OPM regulation requiring express direction for direct payment of retirement benefits to a former spouse is valid and does not contravene congressional purpose.
• Panama City-Bay Cnty. Airport & Indus. Dist. v. Kellogg Brown & Root Servs., Inc.
  140 So. 3d 1112· Fla. 1st DCA· 2014-06-18 ·cited 3×
  The Panama City-Bay County Airport appealed a judgment in favor of KBR, arguing that the trial court improperly disclosed a settlement agreement between the Airport and co-defendant Phoenix to the jury, which KBR used to discredit the Airport's case. The court held that Florida l
• Johnson v. United States
  566 F. Supp. 1012· M.D. Fla.· 1983-03-31 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the plaintiffs, as trustees of a union vacation fund, did not face the requisite double liability to maintain an interpleader action against the IRS and individual defendants.
• Lujerio Cordero v. Transamerica Annuity Serv. Corp.
  34 F.4th 994· 11th Cir.· 2022-05-17 ·cited 2×
  The court certified a question of New York law to the New York Court of Appeals regarding whether a plaintiff sufficiently alleges a breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing when the defendant undermines a fundamental contract objective, even if the duty wasn
• Restoration 1 CFL, LLC v. Asi Preferred Ins. Corp.
  239 So. 3d 747· Fla. 5th DCA· 2018-02-09 ·cited 2×
  Florida appellate court reversed dismissal of breach of contract action, holding that an insurance policy clause requiring mortgagee consent to assignment of post-loss claim benefits violates Florida law and is unenforceable.
• Nextgen Restoration Inc. v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp.
  126 So. 3d 1255· Fla. 2d DCA· 2013-11-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court erred in dismissing the complaint based on an invalid assignment when that issue was not properly raised and the relevant contract was not in the record.
• In re Magness v. The Dayton Country Club Co. & Cynthia Magness Karas
  972 F.2d 689· 6th Cir.· 1992-08-17 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the 'applicable law' exception under 11 U.S.C. § 365(c) refers to non-bankruptcy law that excuses a party from accepting performance from a third party due to the materiality of the original party's identity. This interpretation reconciles § 365(c) with § 365(
• In re Jordan v. Jordan
  914 F.2d 197· 9th Cir.· 1990-09-19 ·cited 2×
  A trust created from a debtor's settlement of a personal injury claim is considered self-settled under Washington law and is therefore not an excludable spendthrift trust from the bankruptcy estate.
• Restoration v. ASI Preferred
  42 Fla. L. Weekly D2543· Fla. 5th DCA· 2018-02-05 ·cited 1×
  An insurance policy provision requiring mortgagee consent to assignment of post-loss claim benefits is invalid and unenforceable under Florida law.
• Healthcare Ally Mgmt. of Cal., LLC v. Unitedhealthcare Servs., Inc.
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-10-22
  Healthcare Ally Management of California sought to collect underpayment claims on behalf of medical providers who treated patients covered by UnitedHealthcare's insurance plans, alleging that UnitedHealthcare misrepresented its reimbursement rates as "usual, customary, reasonable
• Zausner Foods Corp. v. Blandin
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-08-16
  The court held that the defendants' motion to dismiss should be denied because the plaintiff sufficiently pled its claims, has standing, and the court has personal jurisdiction over the defendants.
• Lujerio Cordero v. Transamerica Annuity Serv.
  71 F.4th 843· 11th Cir.· 2023-06-16
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims for breach of contract under New York law and exploitation of a vulnerable adult under Florida law failed to state a cause of action.
• Celgene Corp. v. Humana Pharmacy, Inc.
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2023-05-31
  The court granted Celgene's motion for partial summary judgment, finding that HPI breached the Distribution and Services Agreement by assigning its legal claims to its parent company, Humana, without Celgene's consent, in violation of the unambiguous anti-assignment clause. The c
• Worldwide Aircraft Servs., Inc. v. Anthem Ins. Cos., Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-03-16
  The court held that Plaintiffs failed to establish standing for Jet ICU to bring an ERISA claim due to an anti-assignment clause in the plan and lack of proper assignment, and that the complaint failed to identify specific plan provisions for the claim.
• Cordero v. Transamerica Annuity Serv. Corp.
  S.D. Fla.· 2021-03-29
  The court held that the plaintiff's breach of contract claim failed because the anti-assignment clause in the settlement agreement was for the defendants' benefit and they had no affirmative obligation to enforce it. The court also held that the plaintiff's claim under Florida's
• Simon Prop. Grp., L.P. v. Taylor
  S.D. Fla.· 2020-10-20
  The court held that Casino was not entitled to attorney's fees under either federal or state law because it was not the prevailing party, as the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the case after achieving the injunctive relief it sought.
• MTA Canada Royalty Corp.
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2020-09-16
  The Court granted the defendant's motion to dismiss, holding that the anti-assignment clause in the agreement unambiguously prohibited the assignment of rights by operation of law, including through a merger. The plaintiff, as a successor-in-interest, therefore lacked standing to
• Chiron Recovery Ctr., LLC v. United Health Grp., Inc.
  S.D. Fla.· 2020-06-30
  The court held that Chiron's claims brought via power of attorney were dismissed due to lack of standing and shotgun pleading, and claims based on invalid assignments were dismissed, while claims based on valid assignments and Chiron's individual claims survived.
• Cordero v. Transamerica Annuity Serv. Corp.
  S.D. Fla.· 2020-04-06
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to state claims for breach of contract, constructive fraud, exploitation of disabled adult, and RICO due to insufficient pleading and application of legal doctrines like the economic loss rule.
• Allegiance Benefit Plan Mgmt., Inc. v. Reliastar Life Ins. Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2020-03-23
  The court held that the plaintiff, as an assignee, lacked standing because the insurance policy's anti-assignment clause prohibited the assignment, and the post-loss exception did not apply to this type of policy.
• CNH Indus. Am. LLC v. C.A. No. N12C-07-108 EMD CCLD Am. Cas. Co. OF Reading
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2016-08-19
  The court held that Travelers waived its right to enforce notice and cooperation provisions in its insurance policies. Furthermore, Travelers' indemnity payments did not extinguish its duty to defend earlier than July 6, 2015, the date it reimbursed CNH for past settlements, as t
• Asap Restoration & Constr., Inc. v. Tower Hill Signature Ins. Co.
  165 So. 3d 736· Fla. 4th DCA· 2015-05-20
  The court held that the trial court erred in finding that the anti-assignment clause and loss payment provision precluded the assignment of the insurance claim.
• The Weitz Co., LLC v. MCW Acquisition, LLC
  116 So. 3d 623· Fla. 3d DCA· 2013-07-03
  Weitz Company, a general contractor, appealed summary judgment in favor of MCW Acquisitions, a waterproofing subcontractor that acquired Metro Caulking's business and assumed its contractual obligations. The court reversed, finding that MCW validly assumed Metro Caulking's subcon
• Clubcorp, Inc. v. Pinehurst, LLC
  Del. Ch.· 2011-11-15
  The Court granted in part and denied in part the motion for substitution of parties, ordering that the successor entities be joined as plaintiffs rather than substituted, to allow for further development of the record regarding the anti-assignment provision. The Court denied the
• Rain v. THE Donning Company/Publishers
  964 F.2d 1455· 4th Cir.· 1992-05-28
  The court held that the district court erred in denying arbitration based on the intertwining doctrine, and that arbitrable issues must be separated from non-arbitrable ones. The court also found that the royalty exception in the arbitration clause was narrow.
• Fittger Realty Co., Inc. v. United States
  272 F.2d 761· 5th Cir.· 1959-12-14
  The court held that the lease was validly assigned and remained in effect, entitling the assignee to compensation for the leasehold interest in the condemned property.