Lesson. A body attachment is a judicial tool that essentially operates as an arrest warrant for compelling a judgment debtor, who is in contempt, to appear in court. These writs may not issue until a prior “show cause” order to appear has been personally served on the defendant, and ignored by that defendant. If validly issued, a writ of body attachment must sufficiently identify the defendant and state the writ’s expiration date, which is 180 days after its issuance.
Case cite. Murphy v. Cook, 225 N.E.3d 217 (Ind. Ct. App. 2023)
Legal issue. Whether a writ of body attachment was valid.
Vital facts. A small claims court entered a money judgment against Defendant. The court issued an order requiring Defendant to appear in court to answer as to her assets. Having failed to appear, the court next issued a “show cause” order that once again required Defendant to come to court and explain her prior failure to appear. What followed was the court’s issuance of a writ of body attachment. Over a year later, a sheriff’s deputy stopped Defendant because her license plate was not visible. Dispatch advised the deputy that there was an active warrant for a body attachment, so the deputy arrested Defendant, who spent the weekend in jail.
Procedural history. Defendant later moved to set aside the writ of body attachment. The trial court denied Defendant’s motion.
Key rules. In instances of collection proceedings, a writ of body attachment essentially is an arrest warrant for a judgment debtor to be hauled into court. For example, if a judgment debtor failed to be present for post-judgment collection proceedings, the court could issue a body attachment.
Indiana Trial Rule 64(A) controls. Subsections (2) and (4) were at issue in Murphy. Two key components of the rule are (a) the pre-writ “show cause” order must be served upon the defendant personally and (b) the writ automatically expires after 180 days, which expiration must appear on the face of the writ. In addition, the writ must sufficiently identity the defendant.
Holding. The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s order and remanded the case for purposes of setting aside the body attachment.
Policy/rationale. Writs of body attachment are a judgment creditor’s last resort to get a judgment debtor in court to answer as to his or her assets. They usually come into play after the judgment debtor has ignored at least two orders to appear. In Murphy, however, not only were the requirements of Rule 64(A) not satisfied, but the writ, even if valid, had expired at the time of the arrest. The Court’s opinion, prompted by an appeal handled by Indiana Legal Services, a charitable organization, serves as a cautionary tale:
[we] urge [trial] courts to be mindful of the provisions and requirements of Trial Rule 64(A) with respect to issuing a body attachment including the provision that such an attachment for a person expires 180 days after it is issued and the requirement that the expiration date shall appear on the face of the writ.
__________
Part of my practice involves representing parties in post-judgment collection proceedings. If you need assistance with a similar matter, please call me at 317-639-6151 or email me at john.waller@dinsmore.com. Also, don’t forget that you can follow me on Twitter @JohnDWaller or on LinkedIn, or you can subscribe to posts via RSS or email as noted on my home page.