SE Property Holdings, LLC v. Unified Recovery Group, LLC et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting 85 Motion for Charging Order against Jeff S. Green filed by SE Property Holdings, LLC., without further action by the Court, unless the Defendants file an objection to Sephs Application (doc. 85) on or b efore November 21, 2014. A separate Charging Order to effectuate the decision in this memorandum order will be entered contemporaneously herewith. It is further ORDERED that the Charging Order will become effective November 26, 2014, without further action by the Court unless an objection is filed, and the Court rescinds the Charging Order. Signed by Judge Kristi K. DuBose on 11/12/2014. copies to parties. (sdb)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
SE PROPERTY HOLDINGS, LLC.,
UNIFIED RECOVERY GROUP, LLC,
MISC. ACTION NO. 14-0008-KD-M
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This action is before the Court on the Application for Charging Order pursuant to Ala.
Code §10A-5-6.05, against Jeff S. Green filed by Plaintiff SE Property Holdings, LLC (Seph)
(doc. 85). Seph alleges that Defendant Green has not satisfied the final judgment and therefore,
it is necessary to obtain a charging order against his interests in certain limited liability
On or about September 27, 2013, judgment was rendered by the United States District
Court for the Middle District of Louisiana in favor of Seph and against Green and other codefendants. The judgment was registered in this District on March 27, 2014 by filing a certified
copy of the judgment (Doc.1). 1 The principal judgment amount was $23,626,922.31, plus
interest as of November 5, 2012, in the amount of $2,784,717.10; with post-judgment interest at
a rate of 8% per annum on $16,666.85 of the judgment, a per diem of $3.65; and with post1
Title 28 U.S.C. § 1963 provides for “[r]egistration of judgment for enforcement in other
districts” and states that a judgment of district court “may be registered by filing a certified copy
of the judgment in any other district[.]” Id. “A judgment so registered shall have the same effect
as a judgment of the district court of the district where registered and may be enforced in like
judgment interest at a rate of 18% per annum on $23,610,255.46, of the judgment
($23,626,922.31-$16,666.85), and a per diem of $11,643.41. Additional interest continues to
accrue on the judgment.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 69(a)(1) provides that a “money judgment is enforced by
a writ of execution, unless the court directs otherwise. The procedure on execution-and in
proceedings supplementary to and in aid of judgment or execution-must accord with the
procedure of the state where the court is located, but a federal statute governs to the extent it
Seph represents that Green has a membership interest in the following Alabama limited
liability companies: Placid Drive, LLC; Ashford Park, LLC; Catahoula Trading Company, LLC;
Greenwings, LLC; G-Mc Aviation, LLC; Go Development, LLC; Green & Sons, LLC; Green &
Sons II, LLC; Hawks Eye, LLC; J-Max, LLC; LBG, LLC; and Unified Recovery Group, LLC.
Seph also alleges that Green has a membership interest in the following Louisiana limited
liability companies: IED, LLC; Enon, LLC; SGG Properties, LLC; Mill Creek Farm, LLC; and
631 Main, LLC.
Under the Alabama Limited Liability Company Law,2 “[o]n application to a court of
competent jurisdiction by any judgment creditor of a member or assignee, the court may charge
the interest of the member or assignee with payment of the unsatisfied amount of the judgment
with interest. To the extent so charged, the judgment creditor has only the rights of an assignee
of financial rights.” Ala.Code § 10A–5–6.05(a) (repealed effective Jan. 1, 2017). Section 10A–
5–6.05 “shall be the sole and exclusive remedy of a judgment creditor with respect to the
judgment debtor's membership interest.” Id.
Ala. Code § 10A-5-1.01, et seq.
Upon consideration, the Court finds that Seph’s Application for Charging Order under
Ala. Code § 10A-5-6.05 against the interests of Jeff S. Green is due to be granted unless the
Defendants present valid authority indicating otherwise.3 Accordingly, Seph’s Application (doc.
85) is GRANTED, without further action by the Court, unless the Defendants file an objection
to Seph’s Application (doc. 85) on or before November 21, 2014.
A separate Charging Order to effectuate the decision in this memorandum order will be
entered contemporaneously herewith; it is further ORDERED that the Charging Order will
become effective November 26, 2014, without further action by the Court unless an objection is
filed, see infra, and the Court rescinds the Charging Order.
DONE and ORDERED this 12th day of November 2014.
s / Kristi K DuBose
KRISTI K. DuBOSE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
This Court has previously issued charging orders under this statute in other actions. See
Parke v. Glover, Civil Action No. 2:11-00639-KD-M, 2014 WL 1577509 (S.D. Ala. Apr. 21,
2014); Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. Mitchell Co., Civil Action No. 11-00578-N, 2013 WL 5745839
(S.D. Ala. Oct. 23, 2013) (Nelson, M.J.); Regions Bank v. Stewart, Civil Action No. 10-0145-M,
2011 WL 1827453 (S.D. Ala. May 10, 2011) (Milling, M.J.); Vision Bank v. Swindall, Civil
Action No. 09-00442-CG-M (S.D. Ala. April 3, 2012 (Doc. 108); November 30, 2010 (Doc. 71);
December 4, 2012 (Doc. 111)). Other federal courts have done so as well under the state statutes
of their respective jurisdictions. See Scottsdale Ins., 2013 WL 5745839, at n.2 (citing cases).
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?