Safeco Insurance Company of America v. Raisch Company et al

Filing 37

ORDER CHARGING DEFENDANT'S PARTNERSHIP INTEREST. Signed by Judge Paul S. Grewal on March 20, 2013. (psglc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/20/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN JOSE DIVISION
SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF
AMERICA,

)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
v.
)
)
RAISCH COMPANY, a California
)
CORPORATION, and DOUGLAS RAISCH, an )
individual,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
)

Case No.: C 11-05332 PSG
ORDER CHARGING DEFENDANT’S
PARTNERSHIP INTEREST

On November 27, 2012, the court granted the parties’ stipulation for entry of judgment
against Defendants Raisch Company and Douglas Raisch (collectively, “Defendants”) in the

20
amount of $298,329.81. On January 16, 2013, Plaintiff Safeco Insurance Company of America
21
22

(“Safeco”) moved for entry of a charging order against non-party partnership AG Raisch, B A

23

Raisch, D E Raisch, D KL dba R&R Farms (“R&R Farms”) located at 15581 Toyon Dr., Los

24

Gatos, CA 95030. Third-party Raisch Investment Group, Ltd. (“RIG”) filed a non-opposition but

25

noted that it holds a senior judgment against Defendants and a charging order against R&R Farms.

26

On March 5, 2013, Safeco and RIG appeared for hearing, but Defendants did not appear. Having

27

considered the papers and arguments of counsel, the motion is GRANTED.

28
1

Case No.: 11-5332 PSG
ORDER CHARGING DEFENDANT’S PARTNERSHIP INTEREST

Taken together, California Code of Civil Procedure § 708.310-708.320 and Corporations

1
2

Code § 16504 allow the court to impose a charging order against the judgment debtor’s

3

transferable partnership interest to satisfy any outstanding judgment against the debtor partner.1

4

Safeco has submitted declarations from a Santa Clara Superior Court proceeding of both Defendant

5

Douglas Raisch and Bryan Raisch, partner in the general partnership of R&R Farms.2 While these

6

declarations establish that at least as of August 20, 2012, Douglas Raisch had a 25% partnership

7
8
9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

interest in R&R Farms, it is unclear as to whether said partnership interest was transferable and
whether Douglas Raisch still holds the interest.3 Without deciding this issue, the court finds it
appropriate to impose a charging order on any partnership interest that remains.

11
12
13
14

Any partnership interest Defendant and judgment debtor Douglas Raisch holds in R&R
Farms is hereby charged with the unpaid balance of the judgment entered against Douglas Raisch
in favor of Safeco on November 27, 2012, in the sum of $298,329.81 plus interest at the rate of
0.17% per annum calculated from the date of the judgment.4

15
Within 90 days of this order, R&R Farms shall provide to Safeco a written accounting of

16
17

its assets and liabilities, along with sufficient backup documentation, to allow Safeco a meaningful

18

opportunity to evaluate the financial strength of the partnership.

19
20
21
22
23

1

See U.S. Fid. & Guar. Co. v. The Scott Companies, Inc., Case No. 03-5376SBAEMC, 2008 WL
728874, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 17, 2008).
2

See Docket No. 35.

3

See id.

24
25
4

26
27
28

It is well-established that even in diversity cases, post-judgment interest is determined according
to federal law. See Northrop Corp. v. Triad Int'l Mktg., S.A., 842 F.2d 1154, 1155 (9th Cir. 1988).
The postjudgment interest rate therefore is calculated in compliance with 28 U.S.C. § 1961 and the
weekly average 1-year constant maturity Treasury yield, as published by the Board of Governors of
the Federal Reserve system for the week of November 23, 2012, which is the week preceding the
judgment.
2

Case No.: 11-5332 PSG
ORDER CHARGING DEFENDANT’S PARTNERSHIP INTEREST

1
2

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 20, 2013

3

_________________________________

4

PAUL S. GREWAL
United States Magistrate Judge

5
6
7
8
9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3

Case No.: 11-5332 PSG
ORDER CHARGING DEFENDANT’S PARTNERSHIP INTEREST