Answers: “No” on Elder Abuse; “Yes” on Fraudulent Transfer.
In Conservatorship of McQueen, Case No. S209376 (Cal. Supreme Court July 7 2014), the California Supreme Court faced an interesting timing issue as to when appellate fees must be filed for and sought in a post-judgment enforcement situation. Specifically, the plaintiff prevailed on both elder abuse and fraudulent transfer claims, obtaining a judgment in which post-judgment costs were incurred, most notably appellate fees for successfully defending both results. (CCP § 685.040 allows a judgment creditor to recover reasonable and necessary costs of enforcing a judgment, including statutory fees “otherwise provided by law,” while Welfare & Institutions Code section 15657.5(a) has a specific fee shifting provision in favor of plaintiff prevailing parties in elder abuse claims.) The lower court and Court of Appeal decided that the plaintiff filed too late for purposes of recovering appellate fees because judgment had been satisfied, with CCP § 685.080 indicating post-judgment enforcement fees and costs could not be recovered after judgment satisfaction.
The state supreme court reversed and affirmed, with the result being tied to the substantive claim at issue.
On the elder abuse claim, it was decided that appellate fees are distinct from post-judgment enforcement expenses. They are not governed by the judgment satisfaction deadline, but the more general CRC deadlines contained in rules 3.1702(c) and 8.278(c)(1)—so plaintiff could seek them on remand.
Conversely, on the fraudulent transfer claim, this was governed by the CCP § 685.080 satisfaction deadline. Plaintiff argued that this allowed for abusive manipulation by the judgment creditor, but the state supreme court saw it differently: the judgment creditor could hold an uncertified check or reject a certified check by opting instead to seek post-judgment costs/appellate fees, while the judgment creditor should prudently expedite post-judgment expense requests if the creditor thinks cash might be tendered in satisfaction of the judgment. So, on the fraudulent transfer claim, appellate fees could not be obtained, suggesting there will have to be an allocation on remand involving just the elder abuse fees.
Comments