what is an assignment of judgment

• LEGAL GLOSSARY

More results...

• Browse By Topic – Start Here
• Self-Help Videos
• Documents & Publications
• Find A Form
• Download E-Books
• Community Organizations
• Continuing Legal Education (MCLE)
• SH@LL Self-Help
• Free Legal Consultation (Lawyers In The Library)
• Ask a Lawyer
• Onsite Research
• Interlibrary Loan
• Document Delivery
• Borrower’s Account
• Book Catalog Search
• Passport Services
• Contact & Hours
• Library News
• Our Board of Trustees
• My E-Commerce Account

SacLaw Library

Www.saclaw.org.

• Documentary Transfer Tax
• Identifying grantors and grantees
• Free Sources
• Community Resources

Enforcement of Judgments

After obtaining a judgment, the judgment creditor’s next step is to attempt to collect what is owed. The court does not collect judgments; the prevailing party is responsible for all collection efforts. However, the court may issue a variety of orders and other documents that may be used to collect your judgment from the debtor.

There are several steps that may need to be taken prior to starting your collection efforts.

Locate the Judgment Debtor

Before any collection efforts may begin, the judgment debtor must be located. Soon after the entry of judgment, this may be an easy task. However, as time passes, it can become increasingly difficult to locate the judgment debtor. For tips on how to do this, see our Legal Research Guide on Finding People and Businesses .

Determine the Debtor’s Assets

It is important to have information about the debtor’s assets, so that the judgment creditor can select the enforcement method(s) that will be the most effective.

An Order of Examination, also called a Debtor’s Examination, is a formal court proceeding during which a judgment creditor may question the judgment debtor about their income and property, to determine what assets are available to the creditor for collection of a judgment.

For More Information Get Information About the Debtor’s Assets , from the California Courts Self-Help Website 

Sample Questions to Ask a Debtor , from the California Courts Self-Help Website

Orders of Examination , from the Sacramento County Superior Court’s Website

Debtor’s Examination , Step-by-Step guide from the Sacramento County Public Law Library

Calculate the Amount Owed

Before beginning enforcement procedures, a judgment creditor must determine the amount currently owed. Unless the judgment debtor promptly pays the judgment in full, the judgment amount ordered by the court is rarely the final amount paid to the judgment creditor. A judgment creditor is entitled to reimbursement of any post-judgment costs, such as the costs associated with enforcing the judgment (including the cost of issuing the Writ of Execution, Levying Officers’ fees, fees for the Application for Order for Appearance of Judgment Debtor, etc.). Additionally, unpaid judgment amounts accrue interest at the legal rate of 10% per year.

Judgment Calculator The San Diego Superior Court provides this free online program that calculates the amount due on a specific day. Just input the judgment amount, date, and payment history, and the program does all the calculations for you.

For More Information

Memorandum of Costs , Step-by-Step guide from the Sacramento County Public Law Library

Begin Your Collection Efforts

There are numerous ways a judgment creditor may collect from a judgment debtor. The method(s) used depend on the judgment debtor’s assets. Below is information about several common enforcement methods.

Collecting from Wages (Earnings Withholding Order)

If the judgment debtor is employed, the judgment creditor may garnish up to 25 percent of the amount over the federal minimum wage that the debtor earns until the judgment is paid in full.

For More Information Collect Your Judgment , from the California Courts Self-Help Website Collect Your Judgment from the Debtor’s Paycheck , Step-by-Step guide from the Sacramento County Public Law Library

Ask the Court to Stop or Reduce a Wage Garnishment ,  Step-by-Step guide from the Sacramento County Public Law Library

Sacramento Sheriff Civil Bureau, Civil Process Types and Fees Provides details of the procedures and required documents. Click on “Earnings Withholding Order” for more information.

Collecting Money from a Bank Account (Bank Levy)

If the judgment debtor has a bank account or safe deposit box, the judgment creditor may be able to take money from the account or seize the contents of the box.

For More Information Collect from the Debtor’s Property , from the California Courts Self-Help Website

Collect Your Judgment from the Debtor’s Bank Account , Step-by-Step guide from the Sacramento County Public Law Library

Ask the Court to Stop or Reduce a Bank Levy , Step-by-Step guide from the Sacramento County Public Law Library

Placing a Lien on Real Property

If the judgment debtor owns real property, the judgment creditor may place a lien on the property. If the debtor tries to sell or refinance the property, the creditor will be paid the judgment amount plus accrued interest from the escrow. In some situations, it may also be possible to “foreclose” on the judgment lien, and force the sale of the property. This is only an option is there is enough equity in the property to pay all existing liens and exemptions, as well as the costs of foreclosure.

Collect from the Debtor’s Property , from the California Courts Self-Help Website

Placing a Judgment Lien , Step-by-Step guide from the Sacramento County Public Law Library

Judgment Liens on Property in California , an article from Nolo Press

Placing a Lien on Personal Property

A judgment creditor can have the sheriff take the debtor’s personal property and sell it at public auction to pay the debt. This can be any type of property, such as jewelry, computers or other electronic equipment, musical instruments, coin collections, etc. This is an expensive process, though, so unless the property is extremely valuable, it is rarely worthwhile.

Notice of Judgment Lien , from the California Secretary of State

Placing a Lien on a Lawsuit the Debtor Has Against Someone Else

If the judgment debtor has a lawsuit against someone else, the judgment creditor may place a lien on the money the debtor hopes to recover if he or she wins that lawsuit.

For More Information Collect from the Debtor’s Property , from the California Courts Self-Help Website 

Placing a Till Tap or Keeper

If the judgment debtor is a business or the sole proprietor of a business, the sheriff may visit the business and take all money on the premises to pay the judgment and the sheriff’s fee. The sheriff’s department may also station a deputy near the cash register, and take possession of all funds as they come in.

For More Information More Ways to Collect , from the California Courts Self-Help Website

Suspending the Debtor’s Real Estate, Contractor’s, or Driver’s License

If the judgment is related to a license, (e.g., a car accident is related to a driver’s license; construction defects are related to a contractor’s license), the judgment creditor may be able to have the judgment debtor’s license suspended.

Unsatisfied Judgments , from the Department of Motor Vehicles Judgments over $1000 , $750 if judgment issued prior to Jan. 1, 2017 Judgments under $1000 , $750 if judgment issued prior to Jan. 1, 2017

Suspending a Driver License to Force Payment ,  from the Los Angeles County Department of Consumer Affairs

Civil Judgments ,  Contractors State License Board Consumer Recovery Account , California Department of Real Estate

Obtaining a Seizure, Turnover, or Assignment Order

A seizure order allows the sheriff to take property from a private residence, while a turnover order requires the judgment debtor to give the property to the sheriff. These orders are most commonly used for large, expensive items, such as pianos, boats, or stereo systems. An assignment order requires the debtor to assign ongoing payments, such as sales commissions or rents, to the judgment creditor.

Renew the Judgment if Necessary

Money judgments automatically expire after 10 years, unless the judgment creditor renews the judgment before it expires. A judgment may be renewed for another 10 years, and renewed repeatedly until it is paid in full. Expired judgments cannot be enforced, so judgment creditors must be careful to renew judgments in a timely manner.

For More Information Renew Your Judgment , from the California Courts Self-Help Website

Renew Your Judgment , Step-by-Step guide from the Sacramento County Public Law Library 

Once the Judgment is Paid in Full

Once a judgment is paid, either in full or in an amount the judgment creditor agrees to accept as full payment, the judgment creditor must file an  Acknowledgement of Satisfaction of Judgment  (EJ-100) with the court. It must also be filed with the County Recorder’s Office if any liens were placed on real property, and with the Secretary of State’s Office if liens were placed on personal property. If you do not file an Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment, the judgment debtor may sue you for any damages caused by your failure to file the Acknowledgment, plus $100.

For More Information After the Judgment is Paid , from the California Courts Self-Help Website

After Your Judgment is Paid , Step-by-Step guide from the Sacramento County Public Law Library 

This material is intended as general information only. Your case may have factors requiring different procedures or forms. The information and instructions are provided for use in the Sacramento County Superior Court. Please keep in mind that each court may have different requirements. If you need further assistance consult a lawyer.

When Assigning the Right to Pursue Relief, Always Remember to Assign Title to, Or Ownership in, The Claim

• Posted on: Oct 4 2016

Whether a party has standing to bring a lawsuit is often considered through the constitutional lens of justiciability – that is, whether there is a “case or controversy” between the plaintiff and the defendant “within the meaning of Art. III.” Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490, 498 (1975). To have Article III standing, “the plaintiff [must have] ‘alleged such a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy’ as to warrant [its] invocation of federal-court jurisdiction and to justify exercise of the court’s remedial powers on [its] behalf.” Id. at 498–99 (quoting Baker v. Carr , 369 U.S. 186, 204 (1962)).

To show a personal stake in the litigation, the plaintiff must establish three things: First, he/she has sustained an “injury in fact” that is both “concrete and particularized” and “actual or imminent.” Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife , 504 U.S. 555, 560 (1992) (internal quotation marks omitted). Second, the injury has to be caused in some way by the defendant’s action or omission. Id . Finally, a favorable resolution of the case is “likely” to redress the injury. Id . at 561.

When a person or entity receives an assignment of claims, the question becomes whether he/she can show a personal stake in the outcome of the litigation, i.e. , a case and controversy “of the sort traditionally amenable to, and resolved by, the judicial process.’” Sprint Commc’ns Co., L.P. v. APCC Servs., Inc., 554 U.S. 269, 285 (2008) (quoting Vt. Agency of Natural Res. v. United States ex rel. Stevens, 529 U.S. 765, 777–78 (2000)).

To assign a claim effectively, the claim’s owner “must manifest an intention to make the assignee the owner of the claim.” Advanced Magnetics, Inc. v. Bayfront Partners, Inc. , 106 F.3d 11, 17 (2d Cir. 1997) (internal quotation marks and brackets omitted). A would-be assignor need not use any particular language to validly assign its claim “so long as the language manifests [the assignor’s] intention to transfer at least title or ownership , i.e., to accomplish ‘a completed transfer of the entire interest of the assignor in the particular subject of assignment.’” Id. (emphasis added) (citations omitted). An assignor’s grant of, for example, “‘the power to commence and prosecute to final consummation or compromise any suits, actions or proceedings,’” id. at 18 (quoting agreements that were the subject of that appeal), may validly create a power of attorney, but that language would not validly assign a claim, because it does “not purport to transfer title or ownership” of one. Id.

On September 15, 2016, the New York Appellate Division, First Department, issued a decision addressing the foregoing principles holding that one of the plaintiffs lacked standing to assert claims because the assignment of the right to pursue remedies did not constitute the assignment of claims.  Cortlandt St. Recovery Corp. v. Hellas Telecom., S.à.r.l. , 2016 NY Slip Op. 06051.

BACKGROUND :

Cortlandt involved four related actions in which the plaintiffs – Cortlandt Street Recovery Corp. (“Cortlandt”), an assignee for collection, and Wilmington Trust Co. (“WTC”), an indenture trustee – sought payment of the principal and interest on notes issued in public offerings. Each action alleged that Hellas Telecommunications, S.a.r.l. and its affiliated entities, the issuer and guarantor of the notes, transferred the proceeds of the notes by means of fraudulent conveyances to two private equity firms, Apax Partners, LLP/TPG Capital, L.P. – the other defendants named in the actions.

The defendants moved to dismiss the actions on numerous grounds, including that Cortlandt, as the assignee for collection, lacked standing to pursue the actions. To cure the claimed standing defect, Cortlandt and WTC moved to amend the complaints to add SPQR Capital (Cayman) Ltd. (“SPQR”), the assignor of note interests to Cortlandt, as a plaintiff. The plaintiffs alleged that, inter alia , SPQR entered into an addendum to the assignment with Cortlandt pursuant to which Cortlandt received “all right, title, and interest” in the notes.

The Motion Court granted the motions to dismiss, holding that, among other things, Cortlandt lacked standing to maintain the actions and that, although the standing defect was not jurisdictional and could be cured, the plaintiffs failed to cure the defect in the proposed amended complaint. Cortlandt St. Recovery Corp. v. Hellas Telecom., S.à.r.l. , 47 Misc. 3d 544 (Sup. Ct., N.Y. Cnty. 2014).

The Motion Court’s Ruling

As an initial matter, the Motion Court cited to the reasoning of the court in Cortlandt Street Recovery Corp. v. Deutsche Bank AG, London Branch , No. 12 Civ. 9351 (JPO), 2013 WL 3762882, 2013 US Dist. LEXIS 100741 (S.D.N.Y. July 18, 2013) (the “SDNY Action”), a related action that was dismissed on standing grounds.  The complaint in the SDNY Action, like the complaints before the Motion Court, alleged that Cortlandt was the assignee of the notes with a “right to collect” the principal and interest due on the notes. As evidence of these rights, Cortlandt produced an assignment, similar to the ones in the New York Supreme Court actions, which provided that as the assignee with the right to collect, Cortlandt could collect the principal and interest due on the notes and pursue all remedies with respect thereto. In dismissing the SDNY Action, Judge Oetken found that the complaint did not allege, and the assignment did not provide, that “title to or ownership of the claims has been assigned to Cortlandt.” 2013 WL 3762882, at *2, 2013 US Dist. LEXIS 100741, at *7. The court also found that the grant of a power of attorney (that is, the power to sue on and collect on a claim) was “not the equivalent of an assignment of ownership” of a claim. 2013 WL 3762882 at *1, 2013 US Dist. LEXIS 100741 at *5. Consequently, because the assignment did not transfer title or ownership of the claim to Cortlandt, there was no case or controversy for the court to decide ( i.e. , Cortlandt could not prove that it had an interest in the outcome of the litigation).

The Motion Court “concur[red] with” Judge Oeken’s decision, holding that “the assignments to Cortlandt … were assignments of a right of collection, not of title to the claims, and are accordingly insufficient as a matter of law to confer standing upon Cortlandt.”  In so holding, the Motion Court observed that although New York does not have an analogue to Article III, it is nevertheless analogous in its requirement that a plaintiff have a stake in the outcome of the litigation:

New York does not have an analogue to article III. However, the New York standards for standing are analogous, as New York requires “[t]he existence of an injury in fact—an actual legal stake in the matter being adjudicated.”

Under long-standing New York law, an assignee is the “real party in interest” where the “title to the specific claim” is passed to the assignee, even if the assignee may ultimately be liable to another for the amounts collected.

Citations omitted.

Based upon the foregoing, the Motion Court found that Cortlandt lacked standing to pursue the actions.

Cortlandt appealed the dismissal. With regard to the Motion Court’s dismissal of Cortlandt on standing grounds, the First Department affirmed the Motion Court’s ruling, holding:

The [IAS] court correctly found that plaintiff Cortlandt Street Recovery Corp. lacks standing to bring the claims in Index Nos. 651693/10 and 653357/11 because, while the assignments to Cortlandt for the PIK notes granted it “full rights to collect amounts of principal and interest due on the Notes, and to pursue all remedies,” they did not transfer “title or ownership” of the claims.

The Takeaway

Cortlandt limits the ability of an assignee to pursue a lawsuit when the assignee has no direct interest in the outcome of the litigation. By requiring an assignee to have legal title to, or an ownership interest in, the claim, the Court made clear that only a valid assignment of a claim will suffice to fulfill the injury-in-fact requirement. Cortlandt also makes clear that a power of attorney permitting another to conduct litigation on behalf of others as their attorney-in-fact is not a valid assignment and does not confer a legal title to the claims it brings. Therefore, as the title of this article warns: when assigning the right to pursue relief, always remember to assign title to, or ownership in, the claim.

Tagged with: Business Law

JudgmentBuy

(888) 747-4007, how to prepare anassignment of judgment, august 11, 2023.

I am not a lawyer. This article is not legal advice. The example form in this article is not meant to copy and use as is, but it should explain what you need to know, to prepare and file an assignment of judgment. Laws vary in each state, in California CCP 708.510 specifies how judgments can be assigned.

Because assignments of judgments become court forms, filed at the court, they must follow the rules of the local court. Most courts require assignments of judgments to be done on “pleading paper”. Pleading paper means your paper should have the right captions (words at the top part of the document), spacing, font sizes, and most importantly line numbers down the left side of each page. Most of the time courts want 28 lines per page. One can use a Microsoft Word template, or formatting in your word processor to make legal-numbered documents.

The first step of enforcing any judgment where you are not the original judgment creditor (the person who was the Plaintiff/Creditor in the lawsuit), is to have a correctly prepared, signed, and notarized court-filed document.

This name of this document varies from State to State, and is usually named either an “ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF ASSIGNMENT OF JUDGMENT AND NOTICE OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF ASSIGNMENT OF JUDGMENT” or an “ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF ASSIGNMENT OF JUDGMENT”

There are no court-provided forms to do this, so you have to create your own, perhaps use the example in this article, or find an example in a judgment book or course.

In California, very interesting is the case of: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT IN RE BOYAJIAN, 564 F.3D 1088 (9TH CIR. 2009), PARALLEL CITATIONS564 F.3d 1088, 1090109110921093, the case stated:

Under California law, a judgment creditor may assign a judgment to a third person. Cal. Civ.Code 954. “In doing so, the judgment creditor assigns the debt upon which the judgment is based … Through such an assignment, the assignee ordinarily acquires all the rights and remedies possessed by the assignor for the enforcement of the debt, subject, however, to the defenses that the judgment debtor had against the assignor.” Great W. Bank v. Kong, 90 Cal. App.4th 28, 108 Cal.Rptr.2d 266, 268 (2001) (internal citations omitted). An assignment carries the legal title to he judgment; “the transfer of the title does not depend upon the fact of there being a valuable consideration.” Curtin v. Kowalsky, 145 Cal. 431, 78 P. 962, 963 (1904)”

An example of an “ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF ASSIGNMENT OF JUDGMENT” is at the end of this article. You always start with an original customized form, signed by the person who currently owns the judgment, most often the original judgment creditor. Blue ink is usually preferred as it helps to establish which copy is the original.

The person assigning the judgment (the seller) to you (the buyer) must sign the form in the presence of a notary. (See our  Notary article .)

The form must be signed and stamped by the notary. Once this is done, the form becomes the original that the court needs. Make one copy of it if you are bringing it to the court, and two copies if you are mailing to the court (in case the original gets lost in the mail).

You bring or mail (with a cover letter and a stamped self-addressed envelope) the original and a copy to the court where the judgment originated. If the form meets the requirements of the court, they will stamp (endorse) and file the original, and stamp it, and give or mail you the copy to keep.

Keep your copy, in case anyone challenges your ownership of, or rights to enforce the judgment. When challenged, you can simply fax or mail a copy of it, to end any challenge. Also, for some reason, some judgment enforcers mention how much was paid to creditor, with for example wordings such as: “$10 for the sale of this judgment”, on assignments, which is something that normally goes only on a purchase contract, which is not filed at the court.

Here is an example of an Assignment Of Judgment form I have used in about 20 States. Again, it may not be right for your court. The only way to find out is to bring your first one to court, and see if they will accept and stamp it. This form often takes two pages to print.

— Page One: —-

Paul Plaintiff 124 Fake Street San Jose, CA, 95112 Phone: 408-100-1000 Plaintiff in Pro Per

IN THE SUPERIOR CIVIL COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA

PAUL PLAINTIFF                   CASE # 11-04-CV-999999 (Plaintiff)                          ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF                                          ASSIGNMENT OF JUDGMENT vs. DAN DEBTOR (Defendant)

My name is Paul Plaintiff, Plaintiff in this case, and hereby declare the following in support of an ASSIGNMENT OF JUDGMENT:

1) THAT this original Judgment was awarded by this court on 03/29/2015.

2) THAT Plaintiff was awarded $15,000.00, and Court approved Costs of $0.0 (Which totals as $15,000.00) on 3/29/2015, against Defendant: Dan Debtor.

3) THAT there have been no renewals since the entry of said Judgment by this Court and that Plaintiff already received $0.00 payment on this Judgment from the Defendant.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF ASSIGNMENT OF JUDGMENT – Page 1 of 2

— Page Two: —-

4) THAT Paul Plaintiff of 124 Fake Street, San Jose, CA 95112 is the Judgment Creditor.

5) THAT the last address of record for the Judgment Debtor(s) are Dan Debtor, 444 Cheaters Lane, San Jose, CA 95122.

6) THAT I hereby transfer, and assign all title, rights ownership, and interest in this Judgment to the following person: So and So entity, date.

Signed this__________day of______________________, 20_____ in

the City of: __________________________, State;

_______________________________________________________

Signature of Paul

Plaintiff (Judgment Creditor)

State, County of County, on _____________________ before me,

(Print Notary Officer Name, and Title)

_______________________________________________________ _,

ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF ASSIGNMENT OF JUDGMENT -So And So – Page 2 of 2

(End of the example form.)

This form example was successfully used mostly in California, and in about 20 States. It’s good to start with, but always make sure your local court will accept your form. Note that most states will require State-specific notary language, or the notary will attach their own notary forms.

Assignment of Rents – What, Why, and How?

Article by:

Madelaine prescott, esq., share this post:.

• November 29, 2023

These days, almost all commercial loans include an Assignment of Rents as part of the Deed of Trust or Mortgage. But what is an Assignment of Rents, why is this such an important tool, and how are they enforced?

An Assignment of Rents (“AOR”) is used to grant the lender on a transaction a security interest in existing and future leases, rents, issues, or profits generated by the secured property, including cash proceeds, in the event a borrower defaults on their loan. The lender can use the AOR to step in and directly collect rental payments made by the tenant. For an AOR to be effective, the lender’s interest must be perfected, which has a few fairly simple requirements. The AOR must be in writing, executed by the borrower, and recorded with the county where the property is located. Including an AOR in the recorded Deed of Trust or Mortgage is the easiest and most common way to ensure the AOR meets these requirements should it ever need to be utilized.

When a borrower defaults, lenders can take advantage of AORs as an alternative to foreclosure to recoup their investment. With a shorter timeline and significantly lower costs, it is certainly an attractive option for lenders looking to get defaulted borrowers back on track with payments, without the potential of having to take back a property and attempting to either manage it or sell it in hopes of getting your money back out of the property. AORs can be a quick and easy way for the lender to get profits generated by the property with the goal of bringing the borrower out of default. But lenders should carefully monitor how much is owed versus how much has been collected. If the AOR generates enough funds so that the borrower is no longer in default, the lender must stop collecting rents generated by the property.

Enforcement of an AOR can also incentivize borrowers to work with the lender to formulate a plan, as many borrowers rely on rental income to cover expenses related to the property or their businesses. Borrowers are generally more willing to come to the table and negotiate a mutual, amicable resolution with the lender in order to protect their own investment. A word of warning to lenders though: since rental income is frequently used to pay expenses on the property, such as the property manager, maintenance, taxes, and other expenses, the lender needs to ensure they do not unintentionally hurt the value of the property by letting these important expenses fall behind. This may hurt the lender’s investment as well, as the property value could suffer, liens could be placed on the property, or the property may fall into disrepair if not properly maintained. It is also important for lenders to be aware of the statutes surrounding the payment of these expenses when an AOR is being used, as some state’s statutes require the lender to pay certain property expenses out of the collected rents if requested by the borrower.

In addition to being shorter and cheaper than foreclosure, AORs can be much easier to enforce. In California, the enforcement of an AOR is governed by California Civil Code §2938. This statute specifies enforcement methods lenders can use and restrictions on use of these funds by the lender, among other things. Under CA Civil Code §2938(c), there are 4 ways to enforce an AOR:

• The appointment of a receiver;
• Obtaining possession of the rents, issues, profits;
• Delivery to tenant of a written demand for turnover of rents, issues, and profits in the correct form; or
• Delivery to assignor of a written demand for the rents, issues, or profits.

One or more of these methods can be used to enforce an AOR. First, a receiver can be appointed by the court, and granted specific powers related to the AOR such as managing the property and collecting rents. They can have additional powers though; it just depends on what the court orders. This is not the simplest or easiest option as it requires court involvement, but this is used to enforce an AOR, especially when borrowers or tenants are uncooperative. Next is obtaining possession of the rents, issues, profits, which is exactly as it seems; lenders can simply obtain actual possession of these and apply the funds to the loan under their AOR.

The third and fourth options each require delivery of a written demand to certain parties, directing them to pay rent to the lender instead of to the landlord. Once the demand is made, the tenant pays their rent directly to the lender, who then applies the funds to the defaulted loan. These are both great pre-litigation options, with advantages over the first two enforcement methods since actual possession can be difficult to obtain and courts move slowly with high costs to litigate. The written demands require a specific form to follow called the “Demand To Pay Rent to Party Other Than Landlord”, as found at CA Civil Code §2938(k). There are other notice requirements to be followed here, so it is essential to consult with an experienced attorney if you are considering either of these options. California Civil Code §2938 specifically provides that none of the four enforcement methods violate California’s One Action Rule nor the Anti-Deficiency Rule, so lenders can confidently enforce their AORs using the above methods with peace of mind that they are not violating other California laws.

Whether you are looking to originate a new loan, or you are facing a default by your borrower, understanding what an Assignment of Rents is and how it operates can be extremely beneficial. Enforcing an AOR can be an easier option than foreclosure and can help promote a good relationship with your borrower when handled correctly. If you have any questions about AORs, or need further details on how to enforce them, Geraci is here to help.

Geraci LLP Elevates Steven E. Ernest, Esq., to Partner, Reinforcing Commitment to Excellence in Legal Representation

IRVINE, February 9, 2024 – Geraci LLP, the nation’s foremost private lending law firm, proudly announces the promotion of Steven E. Ernest, Esq., to the

Navigating the Maze: Understanding Service of Lawsuits in California

When it comes to the legal landscape of California, the process of serving a lawsuit is akin to navigating a complex maze. For anyone embarking

What Constitutes a Good Set of Loan Documents?

Sometimes, people are afraid to ask the basic questions, for fear that the questions are too obvious or that they should know better. But a

Private Lending 101: Foundational Considerations in Forming a Debt Fund

In the dynamic landscape of private lending, the strategic establishment of a debt fund becomes a pivotal move for those who seek to be a

• (949) 379-2600
• 90 Discovery, Irvine, CA 92618

Subscribe to our Newsletters

Receive attorney-authored articles, legislative updates, webinar reminders, magazines, and more straight to your inbox. Choose the newsletters below you’d like to receive.

CONNECT WITH US

• Find a Lawyer
• Ask a Lawyer
• Research the Law
• Law Schools
• Laws & Regs
• Newsletters
• Justia Connect
• Pro Membership
• Basic Membership
• Justia Lawyer Directory
• Platinum Placements
• Gold Placements
• Justia Elevate
• Justia Amplify
• PPC Management
• Google Business Profile
• Social Media
• Justia Onward Blog

2015 Missouri Revised Statutes TITLE XXXV CIVIL PROCEDURE AND LIMITATIONS (506-517) Chapter 511 Judgments Section 511.690 Assignment of judgments.

511.690. Judgments of courts of record for the recovery of money may be assigned, in writing, by the plaintiff and the assignees thereof, successively, which assignment shall be on or attached to the judgment, and attested by the clerk of the court or associate circuit judge, and, when so made and attested, shall vest the title to such judgment in each assignee thereof, successively.

(RSMo 1939 § 1300, A. 1949 H.B. 2119)

Prior revisions: 1929 § 1136; 1919 § 1587; 1909 § 2156

Disclaimer: These codes may not be the most recent version. Missouri may have more current or accurate information. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or the information linked to on the state site. Please check official sources.

Get free summaries of new opinions delivered to your inbox!

• Bankruptcy Lawyers
• Business Lawyers
• Criminal Lawyers
• Employment Lawyers
• Estate Planning Lawyers
• Family Lawyers
• Personal Injury Lawyers
• Estate Planning
• Personal Injury
• Business Formation
• Business Operations
• Intellectual Property
• International Trade
• Real Estate
• Financial Aid
• Course Outlines
• Law Journals
• US Constitution
• Regulations
• Supreme Court
• Circuit Courts
• District Courts
• Dockets & Filings
• State Constitutions
• State Codes
• State Case Law
• Legal Dictionary
• Legal Blogs
• Business Forms
• Product Recalls
• Justia Connect Membership
• Justia Premium Placements
• Justia Elevate (SEO, Websites)
• Justia Amplify (PPC, GBP)
• Testimonials

Skip to main navigation

• Email Updates
• Federal Court Finder

Conference Acts to Promote Random Case Assignment

Published on March 12, 2024

The Judicial Conference of the United States has strengthened the policy governing random case assignment, limiting the ability of litigants to effectively choose judges in certain cases by where they file a lawsuit.

The policy addresses all civil actions that seek to bar or mandate state or federal actions, “whether by declaratory judgment and/or any form of injunctive relief.” In such cases, judges would be assigned through a district-wide random selection process.

“Since 1995, the Judicial Conference has strongly supported the random assignment of cases and the notion that all district judges remain generalists,” said Judge Robert J. Conrad, Jr., secretary of the Conference. “The random case-assignment policy deters judge-shopping and the assignment of cases based on the perceived merits or abilities of a particular judge. It promotes the impartiality of proceedings and bolsters public confidence in the federal Judiciary.”

In most of the nation’s 94 federal district courts, local case assignment plans facilitate the random selection of judges. Some plans assign cases to a judge in the division of the court where the case is filed. In divisions where only a single judge sits, these rules have made it possible for a litigant to pre-select that judge by filing in that division. 

In a November 2021 letter, Senator Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), and Patrick Leahy, a Vermont senator who since has retired, raised concerns about a concentration of patent cases filed in single-judge divisions. 

Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., referenced this letter in his 2021 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary , calling for a study of judicial assignment practices in patent cases.

“Senators from both sides of the aisle have expressed concern that case assignment procedures … might, in effect, enable the plaintiff to select a particular judge to hear a case,” Roberts said. During the patent-case study, the Court Administration and Case Management Committee (CACM) determined that similar issues might occur in bankruptcy and other types of civil litigation. Public debate grew when several highly controversial lawsuits, seeking nationwide injunctions against federal government policies, were filed in single-judge court divisions.

In submitting the proposed policy to the Judicial Conference, the CACM Committee said that some local case assignment plans risked creating an appearance of “judge shopping.” The committee also noted that the value of trying a civil case in the nearest court division becomes less important when the impact of a ruling might be felt statewide or even nationally.

The amended policy applies to cases involving state or federal laws, rules, regulations, policies, or executive branch orders. District courts may continue to assign cases to a single-judge division when they do not seek to bar or mandate state or federal actions, whether by declaratory judgment and/or any form of injunctive relief.

In addition to the Judiciary policy, the CACM committee will disseminate guidance to all district courts regarding civil case assignment.

The  26-member Judicial Conference  is the policy-making body for the federal court system. By statute, the Chief Justice of the United States serves as its presiding officer and its members are the chief judges of the 13 courts of appeals, a district judge from each of the 12 geographic circuits, and the chief judge of the Court of International Trade.

The Conference convenes twice a year to consider administrative and policy issues affecting the court system.

Related Topics:  Judicial Conference of the United States