Issues Enforcing Out of State and Out of Country Judgments
Cellai Law Offices, P.C. has experience with some of the biggest issues enforcing out of state and out of country collection judgments. We very often asked to enforce out of state Judgments and Judgments from other countries.
In our vast experience enforcing out of state Judgments (and out of country Judgments), the biggest issues that arise are whether (a) the defendant was properly served with the legal process and (b) whether the originating Court had jurisdiction over the defendant. Typically, jurisdiction over the defendant is something that is not pushed very hard. Whether the debtor knew about the process is always a big issue.
As a result, Cellai Law Offices, P.C. seeks documents from the out of state litigation which shows service on the debtor/defendant and that they knew about the underlying litigation. If you provide these document to the court upfront to show the court that the debtor/defendant was properly served, Judges usually agree to lien the bank accounts and real estate of a debtor without their knowledge or consent.
Debts owed to Your Debtor can be Reached in Satisfaction of a Debt-Reach and Apply
I am frequently asked whether a third party can be sued for a debt or part of a debt when money has been provided to the third party as part of another transaction. My answer is sometimes, yes. In a recent case litigated by Cellai Law Offices, P.C. for a multinational corporation, we were enforcing a promissory note in the Superior Court for the multinational corporation. The debtor had filed a lawsuit in another Massachusetts Superior Court where he was seeking money from a third party. Cellai Law Offices, P.C. obtained an order from the Court which provided that should the debtor recover on his lawsuit, the first funds earmarked for the debtor were to be paid to the multinational corporation. Recently, the debtor won his case and the monies are available to satisfy the debt.
Collecting Debts owed to Your Debtor
Debts owed to Your Debtor can be Reached in Satisfaction of a Debt – Money Had and Delivered
I am frequently asked whether a third party can be sued for a debt or part of a debt when money has been provided to the third party as part of another transaction. My answer is sometimes, yes. In a recent case litigated by Cellai Law Offices, P.C. we were enforcing a Judgment from the Federal District Court, District of New Hampshire against an individual defendant. In looking at the documents of the underlying transaction (just to be thorough even though there was already a Judgment and because the underlying matter that was handled by a different attorney), it became clear that monies were paid to different third parties (in this case family members). According to the client, the main contracting debtor claimed that she needed the money sent to her relatives because she did not have access to her bank accounts. Cellai Law Offices, P.C. sued the additional parties who received the funds under the theory of “money had and received.” Under the theory of money had and received, if you receive money gratuitously, or which you were not supposed to receive, you are obligated to pay it back. The Norfolk County Superior Court entered judgment against all of the various family members that received money on the money had and received claims.
Judgement in 20 Year Old Statute Case
An Action by a Mother for a Decades Old Child Support Order was not Barred by the Statute of Limitations or Laches
Carlo Cellai, Esq. filed an action in 2002 to enforce an approximately twenty two year old child support order. The Defendant-Father-Obligor failed to pay anything under the child support order.
The Court ruled that non payment of a child support order is not barred by the statute of limitations. The father was ordered to pay the entire balance of the outstanding child support order plus all accrued interest.
Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly
Presenting and Passing Non Sufficient Funds Checks Constitutes Fraud
Carlo Cellai, Esq. represented a bank where a bank depositor and former lawyer deposited checks from a different bank into his bank account. Before the checks had a chance to bounce, the depositor withdrew funds from the empty account, the checks bounced and caused the bank a loss.
In laying the groundwork for a fraud defense to dischargeability in bankruptcy, Carlo Cellai, Esq. prosecuted the case on behalf of the bank on the ground that the depositors conduct amount to fraud.
The Judge agreed with Attorney Cellai’s position on behalf of the bank and ruled that the depositor had perpetrated a fraud on the bank. As a result of the creative legal theory, Attorney Cellai set the ground work for a dischargeability claim against the depositor had the depositor filed bankruptcy.
Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly