U.S. Code » Title 28 » Part PART VI— PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS › Chapter CHAPTER 176— FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER A— DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS

28 U.S.C. § 3015

Discovery as to debtor’s financial condition

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 28 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)In General.—Except as provided in subsection (b), in an action or proceeding under subchapter B or C, the United States may have discovery regarding the financial condition of the debtor in the manner in which discovery is authorized by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in an action on a claim for a debt.(b)Limitation.—Subsection (a) shall not apply with respect to an action or proceeding under subchapter B unless there is a reasonable likelihood that the debt involved exceeds $50,000.(Added Pub. L. 101–647, title XXXVI, § 3611, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4939.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, referred to in subsec. (a), are set out in the Appendix to this title.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Section effective 180 days after Nov. 29, 1990, and applicable with respect to certain actions for debts owed the United States pending in court on that effective date, see section 3631 of Pub. L. 101–647, set out as a note under section 3001 of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1994–2023 · leading case: United States v. Bradley
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States v. Bradley (2011) ca11 “28 U.S.C. § 3015 . These tools are designed for use by all lawyers, including those in the United States Attorney’s office.”
U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commissioner v. Robert Escobio (2020) ca11 “; 28 U.S.C. § 3015 . To the extent that the CFTC suspects that Escobio has engaged in fraudulent transfers to avoid paying the Restitution Obligation, subsection D of the FDCPA provides mechanisms for the CFTC to obtain relief.”
United States v. Hawkins (2005) vawd “See 28 U.S.C.A. § 3015 (a) (West 1994). In light of the MVRA’s policy and language, I find that a court-imposed payment schedule does not prevent the government from pursuing this enforcement procedure.”
In Re Barnes (2007) dcd “The proposition seems so obvious that it is not surprising that my limited research found no case law addressing the issue.”
Schueler v. Rayjas Enterprises, Inc. (1994) nysd “Discovery This section is intended to establish the broadest possible scope of relevancy for Federal discovery to find assets to pay judgments in favor of the United States, but it does not limit the inherent power of the court to limit discovery requests because of…”
United States v. Williams (2021) moed “” 28 U.S.C. § 3015 (a). For the reasons stated above, the Court denies [21] Defendant Arronda Williams’s Motion to Stay Proceedings, to Stay Discovery, and for a Protective Order.”
United States of America v. Oudeh (2023) nced “See 28 U.S.C. § 3015 (a). A court has wide latitude over the “course and scope of discovery.”
United States v. Thomas (2015) cod “28 U.S.C. § 3015 . In turn, Fed. R. Civ. P.”
United States v. Johnson (1996) vawd “See 28 U.S.C. § 3015 (a); Fed.R.Civ.P. 69(a).”
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.