When One Solution Is Better Than Two

by Greenberg Glusker Fields Claman & Machtinger LLP
Contact

Over the years, clients have sought my advice after they have obtained a judgment against a limited liability company or a corporation, and after they have tried, without success, to collect on that judgment.  All of the typical judgment enforcement methods have already failed.  Because judgment debtors generally do not volunteer payment and sometimes will take steps to make it much more difficult for a creditor to collect, this scenario is somewhat common.  In response, clients will ask what they can do.  There are a number of options.  These include putting the judgment debtor into an involuntary bankruptcy; another option is to seek to have the judgment amended to add the principals of the debtor as additional judgment debtors.  The case of In re O’Reilly & Collins (discussed below) is interesting because it shows that although both options are available, a creditor might run into problems trying to do both.

Involuntary Bankruptcy

An involuntary bankruptcy can be effective in the right case because it creates some judicial supervision over the debtor’s disposition of assets.  It triggers the possibility of an orderly process for paying creditors.  When compared to trying to chase down assets of the debtor as the debtor moves them around, this approach can be appealing.

Section 303 of the bankruptcy code allows even a single creditor, under certain circumstances, to force a judgment debtor into bankruptcy.  However, this is risky because if the bankruptcy court finds that the correct circumstances did not exist, the bankruptcy court can sanction the creditor in the form of attorneys’ fees and other damages.  More commonly, at least three creditors are required in order to file the involuntary bankruptcy petition.   This is a much safer approach, and counsel for petitioning creditors generally prefer to have even more than three creditors join in the bankruptcy petition.  Under the circumstances described above, where assets are being moved around to the detriment of the judgment creditor, it is certainly worth considering whether there are other creditors that might be interested in joining in the filing of an involuntary bankruptcy petition.

Adding Additional Judgment Creditors

A second option, amending the judgment to add the principals of the judgment debtor as additional judgment debtors, is authorized by section 187 of the California Code of Civil Procedure.  This provision has been interpreted to allow a judgment creditor to demonstrate that the principals of the debtor should be held liable as alter egos of the judgment debtor.  If successful, the court will add the principals as judgment debtors for the full amount of the judgment.

Lessons from In re O’Reilly & Collins

As a creditor in a recent case in the Northern District of California learned the hard way, it can be  important to be selective when deciding which of the above methods to utilize and not to try to combine them.  In the bankruptcy case of In re O’Reilly & Collins, Michael Danko sued his former law firm, O’Reilly & Collins (“OC”), for wrongful termination.  Judgment was granted in favor of Danko for over $3.25 million.  OC, the former law firm, then filed an assignment for the benefit of creditors (a state law insolvency proceeding).  In response, Danko and two other creditors filed an involuntary bankruptcy petition against OC.  Just over one month later, Danko filed a motion in the state court to amend his judgment against OC to add Terry O’Reilly, personally, as a judgment debtor under section 187.  Four months after that, the state court granted the motion and entered an amended judgment against the original judgment debtor (OC), and against O’Reilly personally.   The amended judgment imposed joint and several liability in an amount greater than $4.5 million.

Back in the bankruptcy court, a bankruptcy trustee had been appointed.  The Trustee filed a notice in the state court asserting that because of the bankruptcy automatic stay, “any attempt to obtain a judgment or enforce a judgment against defendant O’Reilly for claims based upon fraudulent conveyances and/or alter ego, are property of bankruptcy estate and are subject to the stay imposed under 11 U.S.C. § 362(a)(3).”

Danko then filed a motion in the bankruptcy court asking for an order stating that the Trustee’s notice was legally incorrect and that the automatic stay was inapplicable to Danko’s judgment and to his underlying claims against O’Reilly.  The bankruptcy court denied Danko’s motion, and on appeal, the district court upheld the bankruptcy court’s decision.

It is well established in the Ninth Circuit that a fraudulent transfer claim to recover assets of a debtor in bankruptcy belongs to the bankruptcy estate, giving the Trustee exclusive standing to bring such claims.  A creditor’s attempt to bring such a claim would be barred by the automatic stay.  The principal issue raised by Danko’s appeal was whether his alter ego claim against O’Reilly was also property of the estate, and thus subject to the automatic stay, merely because the underlying facts in his alter ego claim were the same as those that would have given rise to a fraudulent transfer lawsuit.

Danko argued that the mere overlap of facts was insufficient.  However, the District Court disagreed.  In his section 187 motion, Danko had specifically argued to the state court that “the reason [Danko] is having trouble collecting is that O’Reilly stripped the firm of assets in the three years since Danko was fired, and particularly in the period leading to and following trial, in order to create that ‘trouble.’”  The state court’s reliance on this particular evidence convinced the District Court that the alter ego judgment was similar enough to a fraudulent transfer claim that it belonged not to Danko but to the bankruptcy trustee.  Accordingly, the automatic stay barred Danko from enforcing the judgment against O’Reilly, personally.

In re O’Reilly & Collins is an interesting case because the creditor involved, Michael Danko, attempted to both add an additional judgment debtor from whom he might collect, and to put the original debtor into bankruptcy.  These solutions were in conflict.  Danko’s potential recovery from O’Reilly implicated property of the bankruptcy estate – namely, the assets which O’Reilly had allegedly transferred from the original debtor, OC.  This created a potential fraudulent transfer claim by the bankruptcy trustee to recover those assets.  Therefore, Danko was barred by the automatic stay from enforcing his judgment against O’Reilly.  Sometimes one solution can undercut another.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Greenberg Glusker Fields Claman & Machtinger LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Greenberg Glusker Fields Claman & Machtinger LLP
Contact
more
less

Greenberg Glusker Fields Claman & Machtinger LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.