Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

...r creditors protected under the act. To prevent unfair distributions, the act provides for a period of up to one year preceding the filing of any successful petition during which a transfer or transfers may be held void or voidable. See §§ 631.261-631.263. Relevant to the instant proceeding is section 631.263 providing that the transfer of any property of the insurer made after the petition is filed, but before the liquidation order is entered, is voidable unless made to a person “acting in good faith,” in which ease the transfer is considered valid against the receiver if made for a present fair equivalent value....

...30. The second check, for $46,200, was dated May 26, 1992, and endorsed by Lidsky on May 27. The Department contended in its motion that it was clear Lidsky possessed actual knowledge of the filing of the original petition and therefore, pursuant to section 631.263(3), Lidsky was “conclusively deemed not to have acted in good faith.” It requested the court to enter an order granting partial summary judgment and directing Lidsky to pay over all funds transferred after the fifing of the petition for a receiver....

...l payment. Lidsky now argues that the court erred in granting partial summary judgment because there exist disputed issues of material fact regarding whether or not Lidsky acted in good faith. Lidsky contends that the trial court’s construction of section 631.263(3), upon which it relied in granting partial summary judgment, is unconstitutional as applied because it creates an irrebutta-ble presumption. While section 631.263(3) creates a presumption in the sense that it establishes one state of facts (a person having actual knowledge of the pendency of a delinquency proceeding) as competent proof of another fact (the person having actual knowledge acted i...

...r by deeming or presuming that a transferee “with knowledge” of the fifing of the insolvency proceeding acted in bad faith in receiving the transferred funds. It also placed the burden on the transferee to prove the validity of the transfer. See § 631.263(4). The precise question before us is whether subsection 631.263(3) establishes a rebuttable presumption of bad faith, or establishes a conclusive presumption that cannot be rebutted....

...rements. While section 631.268 creates a presumptive classification, it also provides a reasonable means to rebut that classification. Since the act recognizes that certain transfers of property made in good faith are valid against the receiver (see section 631.263(2)(a)), Lidsky should have been provided the opportunity to rebut the presumption that he acted in bad faith and be allowed to demonstrate that the transfers were made for present fair equivalent value and were not otherwise in derogation of the act’s purpose....