First National Bank of Omaha v. KolucekFirst National Bank of Omaha v. Kolucek
Lisa Lauinger of Johnson, Rodenburg & Lauinger, Bismarck, North Dakota, Attorneys for plaintiff and appellant.
Allen Kolucek, Scotland, South Dakota, Pro se defendant.
PER CURIAM.
[¶ 1.] First National Bank of Omaha (First National) appeals the circuit court‘s denial of a motion to compel answers to post-judgment interrogatories. We reverse.
BACKGROUND
[¶ 2.] First National obtained a default judgment against Allen Kolucek for past due credit card debt. A summons and complaint were personally served upon Kolucek and he made no appearance in this matter. Judgment in the amount of $6,449.93 was entered on March 31, 2006. First National then sent Kolucek “Interrogatories Pursuant to Rule 69” seeking financial information to aid in recovering the judgment amount. No response was received. First National then served and filed a motion with the circuit court seeking an order to compel Kolucek to answer the post-judgment interrogatories.
[¶ 3.] Following a hearing, the circuit court denied the motion to compel reasoning that First National was improperly proceeding under
ISSUE
[¶ 4.] Whether the circuit court erred in denying First National‘s motion to compel answers to post-judgment interrogatories.
A. Whether First National was entitled to post-judgment discovery under SDCL 15-6-69 .
[¶ 5.] First National relied upon
Process to enforce a judgment for the payment of money shall be a writ of execution, unless the court directs otherwise. The procedure on execution in proceedings supplementary to and in aid of a judgment, and in proceedings on and in aid of execution shall be in accordance with applicable statute or rule. In aid of a judgment or execution, the judgment creditor, or his successor in interest when that interest appears of record, may obtain discovery from any person, including the judgment debtor in the manner provided in these rules.
[¶ 6.] In comparison,
Appellant‘s argument regarding the exclusivity of [the examination of debtor provisions similar to
SDCL ch 15-20 ] is not sound. A plain reading of Rule 69 shows that the judgment creditor may obtain discovery from any person in the manner provided in the rules, “in aid of judgment or execution.” Here, respondent attempted to use discovery in aid of judgment. One need not wait until the writ of execution is returned unsatisfied to utilize discovery.
Anchor Gas, Inc. v. Border Black Top, Inc., 381 N.W.2d 96, 98 (Minn.App.1986). Therefore, the court affirmed the lower court‘s decision allowing post-judgment discovery under Rule 69 to aid in execution
[¶ 7.] Here, the circuit court erred as a matter of law in determining First National was required to proceed exclusively under
B. Whether the request for post-judgment interrogatories was properly served.
[¶ 8.] Alternatively, the circuit court found that the Rule 69 interrogatories were not properly served because they were sent by first class mail. Instead, the circuit court imposed a requirement that they be served by certified mail with return receipt. In addressing proper service of post-judgment interrogatories, the North Dakota Supreme Court recognized that the Rule 5 service requirements applied because “discovery documents do not begin a separate action, but merely aid the judgment. Thus, [judgment creditor‘s] Rule 5 service by mail to [debtor‘s] last known address was sufficient.” Mid-Dakota Clinic, P.C., 603 N.W.2d at 479. Similarly,
[¶ 9.] Reversed.
[¶ 10.] GILBERTSON, Chief Justice, SABERS, KONENKAMP, ZINTER and MEIERHENRY, Justices, participating.
Notes
When an execution upon a judgment for twenty-five dollars or more ... is returned unsatisfied in whole or in part, the judgment creditor at any time after such return is entitled to an order from a judge of the circuit court within the county to which the execution was issued, requiring such judgment debtor to appear and answer concerning his property before such judge, within such county, at a time and place specified in the order.