Advertisement

May 21, 2013

Entrepreneur’s Guide to Litigation – Blog Series: Post-Trial and Execution on Judgment

After a verdict is returned in a trial, the party that loses may file various motions challenging the verdict. The losing party may, for example, move the court to reconsider its judgment, which generally is to allow the court to correct a manifest error or fact or the losing party to present newly discovered evidence.  A losing party may also ask the court for a “judgment notwithstanding the verdict,” which essentially asks that court to admit the findings in the verdict, but find that judgment should be granted on different grounds than those decided by the jury. A party may also move the court for a new trial. A new trial can be requested for multiple reasons, such as an error that was made during the trial, the discovery of new evidence, or to correct an award of damages that is excessive or inadequate. 

After exhausting all possible post-trial motions, the successful party (“judgment creditor”) will need to consider how to most efficiently and effectively collect a money judgment from the losing party (“judgment debtor”).Wisconsinlaw provides a judgment creditor numerous different ways to attempt to collect the amount owed by the judgment debtor. In the event that a judgment creditor is unaware of the assets that a judgment creditor may own, the judgment creditor can conduct a supplemental examination of the judgment debtor. This proceeding provides the judgment creditor an opportunity to determine what assets that judgment debtor owns and may be available to satisfy the judgment.

Once the judgment creditor determines what assets the judgment debtor owns, the judgment creditor can begin to attempt to collect from the judgment debtor. For example, if the judgment debtor is employed or otherwise receives regular payments, the judgment creditor can garnish the payments being made to the judgment debtor. Further, if the judgment debtor owns any property, the judgment creditor can seek a writ of execution, which directs the sheriff to obtain possession of the property. Alternatively, the judgment creditor can file a new lawsuit against the judgment debtor asking the court to sell the property free and clear of all liens that may have attached to the property. In both of these situations, the property is sold and the proceeds will be used to pay off the amount owed to the judgment creditor and any parties with an interest in the property.

Overall,Wisconsin law provides a judgment creditor multiple different ways to collect a money judgment from a judgment debtor. Prior to beginning to collect the amount owed from the judgment debtor, the judgment creditor should carefully consider the cost of each method and the likelihood of recovering the amount owed. All too often, a judgment creditor is faced with spending more money while attempting to collect a debt from an insolvent judgment debtor, which simply costs the judgment creditor more money while recovering nothing from the judgment debtor.


Click Below for previous posts from the Entrepreneur’s Guide to Litigation Blog Series:

© MICHAEL BEST & FRIEDRICH LLP

About the Author

Nathan L. Moenck Michael Best Friedrich LLP
Attorney

Nathan is an attorney in the Madison office and a member of the firm’s Litigation Practice Group. Nathan is also a member of the firm’s Distressed Real Estate Team and Reorganization, Financial Restructuring and Workouts Team.

608-283-4438

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.