W&M
 
Indiana Commercial Forlosure Law
About the FirmPractice AreasIndustries ServedAttorneysContact Us Blog
Search All Posts
 
 
View Archives »
 

Announcements
Attachment/Garnishment
Bankruptcy Issues
Court Commentary
Deeds-In-Lieu
Equitable Subrogation
Fair Debt Collection Practices
Forbearance
Fraudulent Transfer Act
Guarantors
Judgment Enforcement
Land Contracts
Lender Liability Act
Lis Pendens
Mechanic's Liens
Mortgages
News
Notable News
Notice/Cure
Other Liens
Piercing Corporate Veil
Post-Judgment Interest
Practical Pointers
Procedure/Trial Rules
Proceedings Supplemental
Promissory Notes
Receiverships
Redemption
Replevin
Sheriff's Sales
Statutes Say
Strict Foreclosure
Tax Sales
Title Insurance
UCC/Security Interests
Yield Maintenance Fees
RSS Feed / Secure Email
 
 Subscribe in a reader

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

My Other Accounts
 
LinkedIn      Twitter
 
Home     Archives     Subscribe

June 29, 2007
INDIANA SUPREME COURT DISCUSSES PROCEEDINGS SUPPLEMENTAL

Do you know what “proceedings supplemental” are?  If you are in the business of collecting judgments in Indiana, and from time to time virtually all secured lenders are, then the June 20, 2007 opinion by the Indiana Supreme Court in Rose v. Mercantile National Bank, 2007 Ind. LEXIS 471 provides a great primer on the subject.  (RoseOpinion.pdf).   

Facts of Rose.  Plaintiffs sued an S-Corp, and the trial court entered judgment against S-Corp for $159,581.  During the litigation, the owners of S-Corp sold the company in an asset sale to Corporation I for $475,000.  Corporation I then transferred its rights and obligations under the asset-purchase agreement to Corporation II, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Corporation I.  After the sale, the owners of S-Corp deposited the sale proceeds into S-Corp’s bank account and, within three days, issued checks to themselves for the entire sale price.  The closing occurred approximately one month after the trial court entered judgment for Plaintiffs.   

About a year later, presumably because the judgment had not been paid, Plaintiffs moved for proceedings supplemental and brought fraudulent transfer claims against S-Corp, Corporation I, Corporation II, and S-Corp’s owners.  Plaintiffs asserted that assets had been transferred out of S-Corp to avoid paying the judgment.  During the proceedings supplemental, Plaintiffs sought to amend the complaint to add additional claims and to recover new damages.  The result was a new judgment for Plaintiffs for $542,435.49 plus attorney’s fees of $162,730.  The Indiana Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s finding that the two owners of S-Corp fraudulently transferred assets, but the Court set aside the new claims for new damages. 

Proceedings supplemental generally.  Proceedings supplemental are designed to help judgment creditors enforce judgments – for discovering assets and to set aside fraudulent conveyances.  Proceedings supplemental are merely the continuation of an original action.  Ind. Trial Rule 69(E) generally governs proceedings supplemental, and the motion is made in the court where judgment was rendered.  Discovery is permitted, and a hearing must be conducted, after which certain property is to be applied toward the judgment.  Id. at 4-5. 

Fraudulent transfer.  Judgment creditors often use proceedings supplemental to bring fraudulent transfer actions, the purpose of which is to remove “obstacles which prevent the enforcement of the judgment . . . through the levy of execution.”  The essence of a fraudulent transfer action is not to attack the transfer or to recover damages.  Instead, the action “is to subject property to execution as though it were still in the name of the grantor.”  Id at 6-7.

New claims.  Unlike Plaintiffs’ fraudulent transfer claims, Plaintiffs also sought new damages from the S-Corp owners by adding a new cause of action under Indiana’s Crime Victims’ Compensation Act, which allows for treble damages and attorney’s fees.  The Court said this was a no-no: 

  Allowing a new claim to be tacked on at this stage would be just as
  unfitting as opening up any other litigation to add new claims after
  judgment.  Such an approach to collections would lay the
  groundwork for perpetual motion-a far cry from the timely and
  efficient system of conflict resolution the nation’s judiciary strives
  to provide.  Proceedings supplemental are appropriate only for
  actions to enforce and collect existing judgments, not to establish
  new ones. 

Id. at 7.  So, a new claim for new damages, and thus the imposition of a new judgment, should be filed in a new lawsuit.  On the other hand, “any action to assist in collection of an original judgment [like a proceeding supplement] must be filed under the same cause number as the original action.”  Id

In addition to addressing the generalities of proceedings supplemental, the Indiana Supreme Court provides clarity for lenders concerning fraudulent transfer actions, which can be appropriately prosecuted in proceedings supplemental or, in other words, in a continuation of the same case and in the same trial court that rendered the judgment.  Any new claims or, in other words, actions for separate and distinct damages, however, must be the subject of another lawsuit.

Email this

Posted at 05:25 PM in Proceedings Supplemental  |  Permalink


 

John D. Waller
John Waller Headshot
View Biography
Indiana Statutes

Attachment: Ind. Code 34-25-2

Depository Financial Institutions Adverse Claims Act: Ind. Code 28-9

Enforcement of Foreign Judgments: Ind. Code 34-54-11

Execution of Judgments: Ind. Code 34-55

Garnishment: Ind. Code 34-25-3

Interest on Money Judgments: Ind. Code 24-4.6-1

Judgment Liens: Ind. Code 32-30-13

Judgments in Mortgage and Lien Actions: Ind. Code 32-30-12

Lender Liability Act: Ind. Code 26-2-9

Lis Pendens: Ind. Code 32-30-11

Mortgage Foreclosure Actions: Ind. Code 32-30-10

Mortgages, Generally: Ind. Code 32-29

Priority of Recorded Transactions: Ind. Code 32-21-4

Quiet Title/Strict Foreclosure: Ind. Code 32-30-3-13 to 21

Receiverships: Ind. Code 32-30-5

Replevin: Ind. Code 32-35-2

UCC-Negotiable Instruments: Ind. Code 26-1-3.1

UCC-Secured Transactions: Ind. Code 26-1-9.1

Uniform Fraudulant Transfer Act: Ind. Code 32-18-2

Indiana Procedural Rules

Rules of Trial Procedure

Rules of Evidence

Local Trial Rules (By County)

Indiana Courts/Govt.

Indiana Supreme Court

Indiana Court of Appeals

Federal Courts: 7th Cir/USDC/Bankr Ct

Secretary of State

Marion County (Indianapolis) Civil Sheriff

Indiana Courts-Home Page

Local Media

Indianapolis Star

Indianapolis Business Journal

Indiana Law Blog

IBJ's Property Lines Blog

The Indiana Lawyer

Trade Associations

American Bankers Association

Central Indiana Chapter of RMA

Commercial Finance Association

Commercial Finance Association Midwest Chapter

Equipment Leasing Finance Association

Indiana Association for Corporate Renewal

Indiana Bankers Association

Indiana Mortgage Bankers Association

Monitor

Mortgage Bankers Association

The Risk Management Association

United Association of Equipment Leasing