Obtaining judgment against a defendant in a civil lawsuit is one thing. Collecting on that judgment is another. The prevailing party can obtain writs of garnishment to seize the judgment debtor’s wages or other writs to acquire the judgment debtor’s property. But these actions may not be adequate to recover the full judgment amount. In this scenario, commencement of proceedings supplementary may enable the judgment creditor to recover the remaining amount. The Mavrick Law Firm defends businesses and their owners in employment litigation, including cases alleging discrimination, retaliation, whistleblower status, and wages and related damages, as well as business litigation (including breach of contract litigation and related claims of fraud), non-compete agreement litigation, trade secret litigation, trademark infringement litigation, and other legal disputes in federal and state courts and in arbitration.
Proceedings supplementary are post-judgment proceedings “which allow for a judgment creditor to ferret out what assets the judgement debtor may have or what property of his others may be holding for him . . . .” Longo v. Associated Limousine Services, Inc., 236 So. 3d 1115 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018). Proceedings supplementary are equitable proceedings that allow a judgment creditor to “investigate assets of the judgment debtor that might be used to satisfy the judgment. Kennedy v. RES-GA Lake Shadow, LLC, 224 So. 3d 931 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017); Gamez v. First Union Nat’l Bank of Fla., 31 So. 3d 220 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010).
The procedures for proceedings supplementary are set out in section 56.29, Florida Statutes. The judgment creditor must first file a motion for proceedings supplementary attaching an affidavit stating the judgment creditor holds an unsatisfied judgment or judgment lien, the issuing court of the judgment, the case number, the amount of the unsatisfied judgment, and execution is valid and outstanding. Fla. Stat. § 56.29. The judgment creditor must also describe non-exempt property owned by the judgment debtor that could be used to satisfy the judgment. Once complete, the motion and affidavit must be filed in the court that issued the underlying judgment. See Kraft Foodservice, Inc. v. Thunder Boat Row & Associates, Inc., 700 So. 2d 181 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (stating that venue in proceedings supplementary reminds with the court that entered the judgment). The trial court lacks discretion to deny the motion for supplemental proceedings so long as the prerequisite procedures are properly followed. Okaloosa New Opportunity, LLC v. LD Projects, LLC, 109 So. 3d 1209 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013).
A court should issue a notice to appear after grating the motion for proceedings supplemental. Fla. Stat. § 56.29. The Notice to Appear directs the judgment debtor, or other person holding the property on behalf of the judgment debtor, to file an affidavit stating why the property should not be applied to satisfy the judgment. The Notice to Appear must also state that discovery under the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure is available, and that the recipient of the Notice to Appear may assert legal defenses. The judgment creditor can then ask the court to require the judgment debtor to appear before it for examination regarding the judgment debtor’s business, financial interests, and property interests.
A common theme in proceedings supplementary is fraudulent transfer. A judgment creditor usually claims the judgment creditor concealed property from execution. If these allegations are proven true, the court must void the transfer and direct the sheriff to seize the property. Becker v. Effenberger, 458 So. 2d 891 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). However, not all transfer by a judgment debtor are fraudulent. For example, transfers to a spouse or relative within one year before the judgment debtor was served with the complaint in the original lawsuit may not be deemed fraudulent if the judgment debtor can prove it. Fla. Stat. § 56.29.
The Fort Lauderdale employment lawyers of the Mavrick Law Firm also represent clients in Miami , Boca Raton, and Palm Beach. This article does not serve as a substitute for legal advice tailored to a particular situation.