Renteria et al v. Canepa
Filing
26
ORDER granting 24 Motion for Judgment Debtor Exam. Defendant Eugene Cleveland Canepa shall appear at 9:00 a.m. on Monday, November 12, 2012, at the offices of Holland & Hart, LLP, 5441 Kietzke Lane, Second Floor, Reno, Nevada 89511 to answe r questions regarding assets and his means of paying judgment. A copy of this order shall be personally served upon judgment debtor at least fourteen (14) calendar days before the hearing scheduled herein and proof of service filed with the Court. Failure to appear may subject debtor to punishment for contempt of court. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman on 10/15/12. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JC)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
6
7
8
9
10
11
OSCAR RENTERIA, et al.,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
EUGENE CLEVELAND CANEPA,
)
)
Defendant.
)
____________________________________)
Case No. 3:11-cv-00534-ECR-CWH
ORDER
12
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ renewed Application for Order Setting
13
Judgment Debtor Exam (#24), filed October 10, 2012. Having secured a judgment in its favor for
14
approximately $999,000.00, Plaintiffs request an order requiring Defendant Canepa to appear for a
15
judgment debtor examination.
16
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 69 provides that the procedure regarding “proceedings
17
supplementary and in aid of judgment or execution–must accord with the procedure of the state
18
where the court is located.” Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 69(a)(1). Rule 69 further provides
19
that “[i]n aid of judgment or execution, the judgment creditor or a successor in interest whose
20
interest appears of record may obtain discovery from any person–including the judgment debtor–as
21
provided in these rules or by the procedure of the state where the court is located.” Fed. R. Civ. P.
22
69(a)(2). The scope of post-judgment discovery is broad and the judgment-creditor is permitted to
23
make a broad inquiry to discover any hidden or concealed assets of a judgment-debtor. 1st
24
Technology, LLC v. Rational Enterprises, LTDA, 2007 WL 5596692 *4 (D. Nev.) (citation
25
omitted). Rule 69 permits a judgment creditor to obtain post-judgment discovery pursuant to the
26
procedures set forth in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or pursuant to state law. Id. Under
27
Nevada law:
28
A judgment creditor, at any time after the judgment is entered, is entitled to an
order from the court requiring the judgment debtor to appear and answer upon
1
oath or affirmation concerning his or her property, before:
2
(a) The judge or a master appointed by the judge; or
3
(b) An attorney representing the judgment creditor,
4
at a time and place specified in the order. No judgment debtor may be required to
appear outside the county in which the judgment debtor resides.
5
Nevada Revised Statutes (“NRS”) 21.270(1). The undersigned has reviewed Plaintiff’s request and
6
finds there is goods cause for the requested relief. Accordingly,
7
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ renewed Application for Order Setting
8
Judgment Debtor Exam (#24) is granted.
9
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Eugene Cleveland Canepa shall appear at
10
9:00 a.m. on Monday, November 12, 2012, at the offices of Holland & Hart LLP, 5441 Kietzke
11
Lane, Second Floor, Reno, Nevada 89511 to then and there answer questions under oath regarding
12
his assets and his means of paying the judgment in this matter and for such other proceedings as
13
there may occur consistent with proceedings supplementary to execution.
14
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this order shall be personally served upon the
15
judgment debtor at least fourteen (14) calendar days before the hearing scheduled herein and proof
16
of service filed with the Court. Failure to appear may subject the judgment debtor to punishment
17
for contempt of court.
18
DATED this 15th day of October, 2012.
19
20
21
22
______________________________________
C.W. Hoffman, Jr.
United States Magistrate Judge
23
24
25
26
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?