The Member of the LLC Does Not Own the LLC’s Property
In a recent decision from the Bankruptcy Court
in Wisconsin, there was applied the rule that an LLC is a legal entity distinct
from its members to the effect that the members have no ownership interest in
the LLC’s property. As applied in this case, the bankruptcy estate of the sole
member of an LLC did not include the property owned by that LLC. In Re Gialamas, ___ B.R. ___, 2019 WL
4201548 (W.D. Wisc. Sept. 4, 2019).
Erick Hallick held a judgment against Thomas Gialamas
for almost $17,000,000. Gialamas was, in turn, the sole owner of Blackhawk
Junction, LLC, a limited liability company that owned a strip mall. When Gialamas
filed for personal bankruptcy protection, Hallick sought an order of
abandonment of the property owned by Blackhawk Junction. Both Gialamas and the Creditors
Committee objected, arguing that Hallick did not have a lien or other
protectable property rights in that property.
After disposing of the argument that a
supplemental proceeding in support of collection of the judgment does not
create a lien in the judgment debtor's personal property, the court went on to
find that there was no protectable interest in the strip mall. Rather:
[T]his court must conclude for purposes of this motion that
the movant has not met his burden of demonstrating that the real estate is now
property of Mr. Gialamas’ bankruptcy estate. The parties stipulate that at all
relevant times the Debtor has owned a membership interest in Blackhawk Junction,
LLC. But that simply means his membership interest in Blackhawk Junction, LLC
was property of the bankruptcy estate. The underlying assets owned by the LLC
are not. 2019 WL 4201548, *3.
In support of this language, one authority cited
by the court was In Re Conan, 487 B.R.
539, 541 (Bankr. W.D. Wisc. 2012) which is cited for the proposition that “although
the estate includes the membership and ownership of the LLC, it does not
include the assets owned by the LLC. Those assets do not become property of the
debtor’s bankruptcy estate.”
As the bankruptcy estate did not own the strip mall
property, there existed no basis by which it could be ordered to abandon it.
Not addressed by this opinion was a charging
order that Hallick had received against Gialamas, which charging order was
supported by the appointment of a receiver.
In a footnote, the court noted that there
existed an unresolved question as to whether the charging order provisions of
the Wisconsin Limited Liability Company Act are the exclusive remedy for a
claim against a member’s interest in an LLC. That determination will obviously
await another dispute.
No comments:
Post a Comment