Ehrenfried v. Brothers et al
Filing
12
ORDER granting 11 Motion For Provisional Remedy Under A.R.S. § 12-2402 Without Notice. Plaintiff shall file a Bond for Attachment in the sum of THREE HUNDRED SEVENTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($375,000.00), and an affidavit under A.R.S. § 12-1522. It is further ordered the U.S. Marshall, or any law enforcement officer in the State of Arizona where the above-described Property is located, shall attach an amount sufficient to satisfy the demand of Plaintiff, together with probable costs of this action. It is further ordered the Clerk of Court shall issue the notices filed by Plaintiff (Docs. 11 -2, 11 -3). Signed by Judge Scott H Rash on 9/24/2024. (See Order for complete details)(ARC)
1
WO
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
8
9
Daniel H Ehrenfried,
Plaintiff,
10
11
v.
12
Dana J Brothers, et al.,
13
No. CV-24-00421-TUC-SHR
Order Granting Application
For Provisional Remedy Under
A.R.S. § 12-2402 Without Notice
Defendants.
14
15
16
After filing his Verified Complaint (Doc. 1) alleging fraudulent transfers of real
17
property, camels, and a camel trailer by Defendants and related civil conspiracies, Plaintiff
18
filed an “Application for Provisional Remedy—Attachment” (Doc. 11). “Plaintiff is
19
requesting an Order by the Court directing the [U.S.] Marshall or any law enforcement
20
officer in the State of Arizona to attach a lien securing Plaintiff’s claims, upon the filing
21
by Plaintiff of an appropriate bond.” (Doc. 11 at 6.) Moreover, the Application requests
22
the Court issue the provisional writ of attachment without notice to Defendants because
23
“Defendants intend to defraud Plaintiff.” (Id.) Having reviewed the filings, including
24
Plaintiff’s Affidavit (Doc. 11-1), and relevant authorities, the Court will grant the
25
Application.
26
Rule 64 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows parties to seek a remedy to
27
seize “property to secure satisfaction of the potential judgment,” so long as the remedy is
28
available “under the law of the state where the court is located.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 64. Under
1
Arizona law, in certain circumstances and upon complying with certain conditions, a
2
plaintiff “may have the property of a defendant attached as security for satisfaction of any
3
judgment which may be recovered.” See A.R.S. §§ 12-1521, 12-2402. This Court can
4
order the provisional remedy of attachment without notice when a “party has disposed of
5
property, wholly or in part, with intent to defraud creditors” or “is about to dispose of
6
property with intent to defraud creditors.” A.R.S. § 12-2402(A)(2).
7
The Court finds the facts included in Plaintiff’s Application and Affidavit are
8
sufficient to satisfy the requirements of A.R.S. § 12-2402. Therefore, Plaintiff is entitled
9
to the provisional remedy requested.
10
Accordingly,
11
IT IS ORDERED Plaintiff shall file a Bond for Attachment in the sum of THREE
12
HUNDRED SEVENTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($375,000.00), and an
13
affidavit under A.R.S. § 12-1522.
14
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, upon the filing of the $375,000 bond and affidavit
15
described above, a Writ of Attachment shall issue for the real property located in Cochise
16
County at 2251, 2261, and 2271 North Sands Ranch Road, Huachuca City, Arizona 85616
17
(Cochise County Assessor Parcels 106-11-006A, 106-11-006B, 106-08-009C, and 106-08-
18
010D), two camels, and a camel trailer that are believed to be located on the real property
19
(collectively, the "Property").
20
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the U.S. Marshall, or any law enforcement officer
21
in the State of Arizona where the above-described Property is located, shall attach an
22
amount sufficient to satisfy the demand of Plaintiff, together with probable costs of this
23
action.
24
25
26
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the Clerk of Court shall issue the notices filed by
Plaintiff (Docs. 11-2, 11-3).
Dated this 24th day of September, 2024.
27
28
-2-
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?