by Structured Settlement Watchdog
Nevada District Court judge Kerry Earley found that structured settlement factoring company Seascape Leasing LLC and lawyers, Patrick M. Etchebehere and Julie D. Noe “committed a fraud on the court by clear and convincing evidence” in a prior successful attempt to transfer the structured settlement payment rights of Brandon Boiclair [See in Re: Seascape Leasing, LLC District Court Clark County Nevada A-18-775027-P below]
In her conclusions of law dated September 19, 2018, Judge Kerry Earley concluded that:
1.It is the statutory obligation of the court pursuant to NRS 42.030 to approve the transfer of structured settlement payment rights by making a determination that the transfer of such rights is in the best interests of the payee.
2.The failure of Noe, Etchebehere and Boisclair to disclose the existence of pending petitions for transfer of structured settlement payment rights affecting Boisclair’s annuity prevented the court from performing, its impartial task of judging cases and, in this case, for determining what was in the best interests of Boisclair pursuant to the above-referenced statute.
3.The non-disclosure of the pending petitions in Departments 6 and 17 of the District Court was an attempt to subvert the integrity of the court itself.
4.Furthermore, the court concludes that the Ex Parte Application for Order Shortening Time submitted by Etchebehere, counsel for Seascape, was also an attempt to subvert the integrity of the court by officers of the court and was an attempt to manipulate the court’ calendar so as to schedule the hearing in this case prior to the hearing in Department 17’s cas on June 20, 2018.
5. The court concludes that Seascape, Etchebehere and Noe committed a fraud upon the court by clear and convincing evidence pursuant to the holding in NC-DSH v. Gamer, 125 Nev. 647, 218 p.3d 853 (1998)
6. Noe, as counsel for Seascape, waived Seascape’s right to an evidentiary hearing
7. The court also concludes that Brandon Bosclair, the seller knowingly failed to inform the court of the open petitions in Departments 6 and 17 .
In vacating the Seascape Order, Judge Earley stated that “had the court known about the pending petitions in the other departments of the District Court, it would not have granted Seascape’s petition and would have continued the hearing on Seascape’s petition until the matters in the other departments were resolved”.
Download A-18-775027-P Amended Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order dated September 19, 2018