Arizona
Charging Order Held Subject to Garnishment Limits
Applying Arizona law, it has been held
that a charging order is limited by the 25% threshold applied as to wage
garnishments. United States of
America v. Alexander, No. CR-05-00472-001-PHX-DGC, 2016 WL
2893406 (D. Ariz. May 18, 2016).
Alexander, the sole member of an LLC,
owned millions of dollars in restitution (the opinion does not address that
nature of those claims. In order to
collect on that debt, the government sought a charging order against the distributions
made to Alexander by his single-member LLC.
Alexander responded that the charging order could not attach to more
than 25% of the distributions, an argument accepted by the court:
|
But the charging order is limited to the garnishment
permitted by Arizona law. The fact that a charging order is entered, however,
“does not deprive any member of the benefit of any exemption laws applicable to
his interest in the limited liability company.” A.R.S. § 29-655(B). Arizona law
limits garnishment to 25 percent of a garnishee’s disposable earnings. A.R.S. §
33-1131(B). “Earnings” are defined broadly to include “compensation paid or
payable for personal services, whether these payments are called wages, salary,
commission, bonus or otherwise.” A.R.S. § 12-1598(4). “Disposable earnings” is
defined as the “amount remaining from the gross earnings for a pay period after
the deductions required by state and federal law.” A.R.S. § 12-1598(3). As the
sole member of E-Logic, Defendant receives distributions equivalent to the
LLC’s annual income. These are provided as compensation for his personal
services to E-Logic. These distributions qualify as earnings and are protected
by the personal property exemption. The charging order therefore cannot deprive
Defendant of more than 25 percent of his disposable earnings. (footnote
omitted).
Although
no Kentucky court has yet addressed the question, likely this result would not
happen in Kentucky.
No comments:
Post a Comment