Judgment - Russell L. Forkey

The Florida Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act – How Can the Act Help You in Collecting on Your Judgment – South Florida and Central Florida Judgment Collection Attorney

Russell L. Forkey — Sat, 04 Jan 2020 18:19:11 GMT

The Florida Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act – How Can the Act Help You in Collecting on Your Judgment – South and Central Florida Judgment (Including Out-of-State Judgments) Collection Attorney.

The Florida Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (“FUFTA”) is contained in Florida Statute §§ 726.101 – 201 FUFTA provides creditors (judgment holders) with various forms of relief to avoid a debtor’s (defendant’s) fraudulent transfer of assets or funds. A creditor (a plaintiff) may avoid a debtor’s transfer where the creditor shows that the transfer was made with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud. To that end, FUFTA provides a non-exhaustive litany of factors – referred to as “badges of fraud” – to consider when determining whether a debtor’s transfer is fraudulent as to the creditor:

The transfer or obligation was to an insider.
The debtor retained possession or control of the property transferred after the transfer.
The transfer or obligation was disclosed or concealed.
Before the transfer was made or obligation was incurred, the debtor had been sued or threatened with suit.
The transfer was of substantially all of the debtor’s assets.
The debtor removed or concealed assets.
The value of the consideration received by the debtor was reasonably equivalent to the value of the asset transferred or the amount of the obligation incurred.
The debtor was insolvent or became insolvent shortly after the transfer was made or the obligation incurred.
. The transfer occurred shortly before or shortly after a substantial debt was incurred.
The debtor transferred the essential assets of the business to a lienor who transferred the assets to an insider of the debtor.

The court may additionally consider any other factor it deems relevant and should look to the totality of the circumstances in determining actual fraud. The existence of badges of fraud creates a prima facie case and raises a rebuttable presumption that the transaction is void.

FUFTA also allows a creditor to avoid a debtor’s transfer that is constructively fraudulent. In order to establish a prima facie case for avoidance based on constructive fraud, the creditor must show that the debtor did not receive reasonable value for the transfer and either (1) the debtor was engaged or was about to engage in a business or transaction for which the debtor’s remaining assets were unreasonably small in relation, (2) the debtor intended to, believed, or reasonably should have believed that it would incur debt beyond what it could pay as the debt became due, or (3) the debtor was insolvent at the time of the transfer.

Please keep in mind that this article is for informational purposes only. It is not designed to be complete in all material respects. Moreover, there may be facts specific to your situation that would have to be considered to determine whether or not a fraudulent transfer has taken place. Thus, if you have any questions relative to this post, please feel free to contact us.

Contact Us:
With extensive courtroom, arbitration and mediation experience and an in-depth understanding of elder abuse, exploitation, commercial litigation and securities law, our firm provides all of our clients with the personal service they deserve. Handling cases worth $25,000 or more, we represent clients throughout Florida and across the United States, as well as for foreign individuals that invested in U.S. banks, brokerage firms or U.S. companies. Contact us to arrange your free initial consultation.

At the Boca Raton Law Office of Russell L. Forkey, we represent clients throughout South and Central Florida, including Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, Boca Raton, Sunrise, Plantation, Coral Springs, Deerfield Beach, Pompano Beach, Delray, Boynton Beach, Hollywood, Lake Worth, Royal Palm Beach, Manalapan, Jupiter, Gulf Stream, Wellington, Fort Pierce, Stuart, Palm City, Jupiter, Miami, Orlando, Maitland, Winter Park, Altamonte Springs, Lake Mary, Heathrow, Melbourne, Palm Bay, Cocoa Beach, Vero Beach, Daytona Beach, Deland, New Smyrna Beach, Ormand Beach, Broward County, Palm Beach County, Dade County, Orange County, Seminole County, Martin County, Brevard County, Indian River County, Volusia County and Monroe County, Florida. The law office of Russell L. Forkey also represents South American, Canadian and other foreign residents that do business with U.S. financial institutions, investment advisors, brokerage, precious metal firms and other types of business activities.

Can a Florida Court Obtain Jurisdiction Over a Non-Florida Limited Liability Company to Enforce a Charging Lien Against a Florida Resident’s Membership Interest? South Florida Commercial Litigation and Collection Attorney

Russell L. Forkey — Sat, 04 Jan 2020 16:02:45 GMT

Can a Florida Court Obtain Jurisdiction Over a Non-Florida Limited Liability Company to Enforce a Charging Lien Against a Florida Resident’s Membership Interest? South Florida Commercial Litigation and Collection Attorney?

If you are reading this article, you are likely a judgment creditor attempting to recover, on your judgment, against an individual or entity that is resident in Florida or that has moved to Florida in order to attempt to avoid paying you.. The Florida LLC Act provides a mechanism to have the court enter a charging order against the judgment debtor’s membership interest in a limited liability company or, under limited circumstances, to order that the member’s interest be foreclosed to satisfy the judgment. One argument that is generally raised by the judgment debtor, concerning non-Florida limited liability companies, is that a Florida court may only exercise jurisdiction over property of a judgment debtor located within the court’s jurisdictional territory. As a result, the judgment debtor argues that because a foreign limited liability is located outside the State of Florida, Florida courts do not have jurisdiction to enforce the judgment against those entities. However, a membership interest in a limited liability company, including foreign limited liability companies, is intangible personal property which accompanies the person of the owner. Therefore, because the member’s interest resides with the Judgment debtor in Florida, the membership interests are located in Florida and are properly subject to in rem jurisdiction in the State of Florida.

Please keep in mind that this article is for informational purposes only. It is not designed to be complete in all material respects. Moreover, there may be facts specific to your situation that would have to be considered to determine whether or not Florida courts would have jurisdiction to enforce your judgment against a foreign limited liability company. Thus, if you have any questions relative to this post, please feel free to contact us.

Contact Us: With extensive courtroom, arbitration and mediation experience and an in-depth understanding of elder abuse, exploitation, commercial litigation and securities law, our firm provides all of our clients with the personal service they deserve. Handling cases worth $25,000 or more, we represent clients throughout Florida and across the United States, as well as for foreign individuals that invested in U.S. banks, brokerage firms or U.S. companies. Contact us to arrange your free initial consultation.

Final Judgment for $258,508.52 Entered Against James Burbage, Marni Burbage, Frank Gaudino and Sean Stropp

Russell L. Forkey — Tue, 01 Dec 2015 21:57:00 GMT

Final Judgment for $258,508.52 Entered Against James Burbage, Marni Burbage, Frank Gaudino, Sean Stropp and Lloyds Asset Management, LLC. by the Circuit Court of Palm Beach County, Florida.

On August 12, 2015, the Circuit Court of Palm Beach County, Florida entered a Final Judgment against James Burbage, Marni Burbage, Frank Gaudino, Sean Stropp and Lloyds Asset Management, LLC. for $258,508.52 that is to bear interest at the legal rate authorized by Florida law. As of the date of this notice, the judgment remains unsatisfied, with the same having been filed with the Florida Department of State, Judgment Lien Registery and a certified copy thereof being recorded in the public records of Palm Beach County, Florida.

Contact Us:

With extensive courtroom, arbitration and mediation experience and an in-depth understanding of elder abuse, exploitation and securities law, our firm provides all of our clients with the personal service they deserve. Handling cases worth $25,000 or more, we represent clients throughout Florida and across the United States, as well as for foreign individuals that invested in U.S. banks or brokerage firms. Contact us to arrange your free initial consultation.

Final Judgment for $49,285.42 Entered Against Larry Morris and Win – Win Seminars, Inc.

Russell L. Forkey — Fri, 20 Nov 2015 14:23:29 GMT

On April 29, 2009, a Final Judgment for $49,285.42 that was to bear interest at the legal rate of law per year was entered against Larry Morris and Win – Win Seminars, Inc., in the Cirucit Court of the 15th Judicial Circuit and and for Palm Beach County, Florida., Case No. 07-5054. The final judgment remains unsatisfied.

The Plaintiffs have docketed the same with the State of Florida Judgment Lien Registery.

Final Summary Judgment For $26,052 Entered Against Percival Phillips

Russell L. Forkey — Thu, 12 Nov 2015 19:27:42 GMT

Final Summary Judgment for $26,052 entered against Percival Phillips by the Circuit Court of Broward County, Florida.

On November 4, 2010, a Final Summary Judgment for $26,052 that was to bear interest at the rate of 6% per year was entered against Percival Phillips in the Cirucit Court of the 17th Judicial Circuit and and for Broward County, Florida., Case No. 06-07541. The judgment remains unsatisfied.

The Plaintiffs have recorded this judgment in the public records of Broward County, Florida and have docketed the same with the State of Florida Judgment Lien Registery.

Contact Us:

Amended Final Judgment For $159,556.24 Entered Against Allan Niskar, Tim Cavender, Richard Onorato, Christina Onorato and Greenwich Financial, Inc.

Russell L. Forkey — Thu, 12 Nov 2015 17:36:00 GMT

Amended Final Judgment For $159,556.24 Entered Against Allan Niskar, Tim Cavender, Richard Onorato, Christina Onorato and Greenwich Financial, Inc.

On October 30, 2015, the Circuit Court of the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida granted the Plaintiff’s Motion For Summary Judgment, for Fraud in the Inducement, against Greenwich Financial, Inc., Richard Onorato, Christina Onorato, AllanNiskar and Tim Cavender, and entered an Amended Final Judgment against these parties, jointly and severally, in the total amount of $159,556.24, which sum will continue to bear interest at the Florida statutory rate.

This amended judgment has been docketed with the Florida Judgment Lien Register and has been recorded in the public records of Palm Beach County, Florida.

Contact Us:

Final Judgment for $270,025.00 Entered Against Mitchell (Mitch) Pasin by United States Bankruptcy Court

Russell L. Forkey — Wed, 11 Nov 2015 15:15:03 GMT

Final Judgment for $270,025.00 Entered Against Mitchell (Mitch) Pasin by United States Bankruptcy Court on September 25, 2015.

On September 25, 2015, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida, West Palm Beach Division, in Adv. Pro. No. 10-03712-PGH-A entered a final judgment in favor of Indigo Lakes, LLC and against Mitchell (Mitch) Pasin in the amount of $270,025.00 that is to bear interest at the legal rate authorized by Florida law.

As of the date of this notice, the judgment remains unsatisfied, with the same having filed with the Florida Department of State, Judgment Lien Registery and with a certified copy of the judgment being recorded in the public records of Palm Beach County, Florida.

Contact Us: