605.0503
Charging order.
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
605.0503 Charging order.—
(1) On application to a court of competent jurisdiction by a judgment creditor of a member or a transferee, the court may enter a charging order against the transferable interest of the member or transferee for payment of the unsatisfied amount of the judgment with interest. Except as provided in subsection (5), a charging order constitutes a lien upon a judgment debtor’s transferable interest and requires the limited liability company to pay over to the judgment creditor a distribution that would otherwise be paid to the judgment debtor.
(2) This chapter does not deprive a member or transferee of the benefit of any exemption law applicable to the transferable interest of the member or transferee.
(3) Except as provided in subsections (4) and (5), a charging order is the sole and exclusive remedy by which a judgment creditor of a member or member’s transferee may satisfy a judgment from the judgment debtor’s interest in a limited liability company or rights to distributions from the limited liability company.
(4) In the case of a limited liability company that has only one member, if a judgment creditor of a member or member’s transferee establishes to the satisfaction of a court of competent jurisdiction that distributions under a charging order will not satisfy the judgment within a reasonable time, a charging order is not the sole and exclusive remedy by which the judgment creditor may satisfy the judgment against a judgment debtor who is the sole member of a limited liability company or the transferee of the sole member, and upon such showing, the court may order the sale of that interest in the limited liability company pursuant to a foreclosure sale. A judgment creditor may make a showing to the court that distributions under a charging order will not satisfy the judgment within a reasonable time at any time after the entry of the judgment and may do so at the same time that the judgment creditor applies for the entry of a charging order.
(5) If a limited liability company has only one member and the court orders a foreclosure sale of a judgment debtor’s interest in the limited liability company or of a charging order lien against the sole member of the limited liability company pursuant to subsection (4):
(a) The purchaser at the court-ordered foreclosure sale obtains the member’s entire limited liability company interest, not merely the rights of a transferee;
(b) The purchaser at the sale becomes the member of the limited liability company; and
(c) The person whose limited liability company interest is sold pursuant to the foreclosure sale or is the subject of the foreclosed charging order ceases to be a member of the limited liability company.
(6) In the case of a limited liability company that has more than one member, the remedy of foreclosure on a judgment debtor’s interest in the limited liability company or against rights to distribution from the limited liability company is not available to a judgment creditor attempting to satisfy the judgment and may not be ordered by a court.
(7) This section does not limit any of the following:
(a) The rights of a creditor who has been granted a consensual security interest in a limited liability company interest to pursue the remedies available to the secured creditor under other law applicable to secured creditors.
(b) The principles of law and equity which affect fraudulent transfers.
(c) The availability of the equitable principles of alter ego, equitable lien, or constructive trust or other equitable principles not inconsistent with this section.
(d) The continuing jurisdiction of the court to enforce its charging order in a manner consistent with this section.
History.—s. 2, ch. 2013-180.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18
cases (9 in the last 5 years), 2016–2026 · leading case: Capstone Bank v. Perry-Clifton Enterprises, LLC
Capstone Bank v. Perry-Clifton Enterprises, LLC (2017)
“[replaced by § 605.0503) to clarify the exclusive remedies available to a judgment creditor as to a judg,ment debtor’s interest in an LLC: a charging order, or a charging order followed by a foreclosure sale.”
McClandon v. Dakem & Associates, LLC (2017)
“She argues that section 605.0503, Florida Statutes (2015), permits a charging order as the sole exclusive remedy to attach a judgment debtor’s interest in a multi-member LLC and that there is no authority .”
Gorrin Jr. v. Poker Run Acquisitions, Inc. (2018)
“See § 605.0503, Fla. Stat. (2015).7 Relying on Olmstead v.”
Wells Fargo Equipment Finance Inc. v. Jason Retterath and Analia Retterath (2019)
“Fla. Stat. Ann. § 605.0503 (3). Charging orders provide a judgment creditor with the ability to satisfy a judgment from the judgment debtor's transferable interest in an LLC while simultaneously allowing the LLC to protect its other members' interests and continue operating.”
Abukasis v. Mtm Finest, Ltd. (2016)
“Assuming A & E Two Associates, LLC, is a lawfully established and existing limited liability company and Abukasis owns a membership interest in the company, the process employed by MTM to realize upon the Abukasis’ membership interest failed to conform with even the most…”
In re Bos (2016)
“061 & § 605.0503 Fla. Stat. (2015). . As noted previously, Alleged Debtors consented to issuance of a charging order in favor of SEPH on Lorna Properties, LLC.”
Regions Bank v. MDG Lake Trafford, LLC (In re McCuan) (2019)
“Additionally, the Court finds that the entry of a judgment against McCuan LLC, under § 726.”
DANIEL PANSKY v. VICTORIA PANSKY (2019)
“Because we find the trial court exceeded its statutory authority pursuant to section 605.0503, Florida Statutes (2016), when it transferred Pansky’s “right, title, and interest” in the limited liability company, we reverse.”
ALVARO GORRIN RAMOS v. MISSISSIPPI REAL ESTATE DISPOSITIONS LLC (2021)
“We reverse because the Order provides Mississippi with a remedy not authorized by section 605.0503 of the Florida Statutes.”
Walter Auto Loan Trust v. Atlantic Acceptance Corp. (2024)
“The Motion requests a charging order, pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 605.0503 , against Mr. Rochefort’s membership interest in the following LLCs: Propertytours.”
JOHN A. KOSTOGLOU v. JOHN FORTUNA (2020)
“After domesticating the foreign judgment, Creditor sought to satisfy his judgment by obtaining a charging order against Debtor’s interest and rights to distributions in a multi-member LLC pursuant to section 605.0503, Florida Statutes. Debtor holds a 5% interest in the LLC,…”
Scotello v. The Turin Aviation Group, LLC (2022)
“Although the court may not order a foreclosure sale, the court may issue a charging order as to Mr.”
— 605.0503(1) — 9 cases
Capstone Bank v. Perry-Clifton Enterprises, LLC (2017)
“[replaced by § 605.0503) to clarify the exclusive remedies available to a judgment creditor as to a judg,ment debtor’s interest in an LLC: a charging order, or a charging order followed by a foreclosure sale.”
Gorrin Jr. v. Poker Run Acquisitions, Inc. (2018)
“See § 605.0503, Fla. Stat. (2015).7 Relying on Olmstead v.”
ALVARO GORRIN RAMOS v. MISSISSIPPI REAL ESTATE DISPOSITIONS LLC (2021)
“We reverse because the Order provides Mississippi with a remedy not authorized by section 605.0503 of the Florida Statutes.”
DANIEL PANSKY v. VICTORIA PANSKY (2019)
“Because we find the trial court exceeded its statutory authority pursuant to section 605.0503, Florida Statutes (2016), when it transferred Pansky’s “right, title, and interest” in the limited liability company, we reverse.”
JOHN A. KOSTOGLOU v. JOHN FORTUNA (2020)
“After domesticating the foreign judgment, Creditor sought to satisfy his judgment by obtaining a charging order against Debtor’s interest and rights to distributions in a multi-member LLC pursuant to section 605.0503, Florida Statutes. Debtor holds a 5% interest in the LLC,…”
— 605.0503(2) — 1 case
Scotello v. The Turin Aviation Group, LLC (2022)
“Although the court may not order a foreclosure sale, the court may issue a charging order as to Mr.”
— 605.0503(3) — 6 cases
Capstone Bank v. Perry-Clifton Enterprises, LLC (2017)
“[replaced by § 605.0503) to clarify the exclusive remedies available to a judgment creditor as to a judg,ment debtor’s interest in an LLC: a charging order, or a charging order followed by a foreclosure sale.”
McClandon v. Dakem & Associates, LLC (2017)
“She argues that section 605.0503, Florida Statutes (2015), permits a charging order as the sole exclusive remedy to attach a judgment debtor’s interest in a multi-member LLC and that there is no authority .”
DANIEL PANSKY v. VICTORIA PANSKY (2019)
“Because we find the trial court exceeded its statutory authority pursuant to section 605.0503, Florida Statutes (2016), when it transferred Pansky’s “right, title, and interest” in the limited liability company, we reverse.”
ALVARO GORRIN RAMOS v. MISSISSIPPI REAL ESTATE DISPOSITIONS LLC (2021)
“We reverse because the Order provides Mississippi with a remedy not authorized by section 605.0503 of the Florida Statutes.”
— 605.0503(4) — 4 cases
DANIEL PANSKY v. VICTORIA PANSKY (2019)
“Because we find the trial court exceeded its statutory authority pursuant to section 605.0503, Florida Statutes (2016), when it transferred Pansky’s “right, title, and interest” in the limited liability company, we reverse.”
Scotello v. The Turin Aviation Group, LLC (2022)
“Although the court may not order a foreclosure sale, the court may issue a charging order as to Mr.”
— 605.0503(7)(b) — 1 case
Abukasis v. Mtm Finest, Ltd. (2016)
“Assuming A & E Two Associates, LLC, is a lawfully established and existing limited liability company and Abukasis owns a membership interest in the company, the process employed by MTM to realize upon the Abukasis’ membership interest failed to conform with even the most…”
— 605.0503(7)(c) — 1 case
McClandon v. Dakem & Associates, LLC (2017)
“She argues that section 605.0503, Florida Statutes (2015), permits a charging order as the sole exclusive remedy to attach a judgment debtor’s interest in a multi-member LLC and that there is no authority .”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.