Quin E Briscoe v. Transamerica Premier Life Insurance Company

── Quin E Briscoe v. Transamerica Premier Life Insurance Company ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Date: April 30, 2026 Category: NEW USCA11 Case: 24-14205 Document: 46-1 Date Filed: 04/30/2026 Page: 1 of 20 NOT FOR PUBLICATION In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 24-14205 ____________________ QUIN E. BRISCOE, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus TRANSAMERICA PREMIER LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, an Iowa Corporation, successor by merger to Peoples Benefit Life Insurance Company, an Iowa corporation, Defendant-Appellant. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 9:23-cv-81577-RMM ____________________ Before JILL PRYOR, LUCK, and BRASHER, Circuit Judges. BRASHER, Circuit Judge: USCA11 Case: 24-14205 Document: 46-1 Date Filed: 04/30/2026 Page: 2 of 20 2 Opinion of the Court 24-14205 This appeal is about an annuity contract. Quin Briscoe pur- chased an annuity that gave her control over several variables af- fecting the investment’s outcome. First, she could terminate the annuity contract and receive a lump sum payment. Second, she could delay her annuity date and postpone receipt of annuity pay- ments. Or third, she could allow the annuity to annuitize and col- lect annuity payments in accordance with one of five Annuity Pay- ment Options. The contract set the default “Annuity Date” as De- cember 1, 2022—the first day of the month following her 65th birthday—but it did not specify a default annuity payment option. And Briscoe never selected one. Nevertheless, in December 2022, Transamerica annuitized Briscoe’s annuity and began disbursing annuity payments in accordance with one of the annuity payment options. Briscoe tried to undo the annuitization, but Transamerica refused. Briscoe sued. The district court determined that Transamerica’s unilateral annuitization of Briscoe’s annuity was invalid because Briscoe never selected an annuity payment option. We agree and affirm. I. In 1996, Frank and Quin Briscoe each purchased $50,000 Vanguard annuities. But unlike most purchasers of annuities, the Briscoes never intended to allow theirs to annuitize. Instead, they purchased the annuities to take advantage of tax benefits associated with annuity accounts, and they planned to fully liquidate them USCA11 Case: 24-14205 Document: 46-1 Date Filed: 04/30/2026 Page: 3 of 20 24-14205 Opinion of the Court 3 upon retirement, prior to annuitization. The Briscoes later contrib- uted an additional $150,000 to each annuity, bringing each annu- ity’s total basis to $200,000. In 2020, Vanguard transferred the Briscoes’ annuities’ servic- ing responsibilities to Transamerica. In 2021, upon reaching his 65th birthday, Mr. Briscoe liquidated his annuity before it annu- itized. But in 2022, upon reaching her 65th birthday, Mrs. Briscoe took no action. Shortly thereafter, Transamerica annuitized Mrs. Briscoe’s contract and began disbursing annuity payments. Mrs. Briscoe contacted Transamerica multiple times, insist- ing that they improperly annuitized her annuity and reques