Charging Orders: The Peculiar Mechanism

Jay D. Adkisson
{"title":"Charging Orders: The Peculiar Mechanism","authors":"Jay D. Adkisson","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2928487","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I. INTRODUCTION: HISTORY OF THE \"PECULIAR MECHANISM\" (1) The charging order is an oddity of American law, occasionally appearing in old opinions pre-dating World War I to address odd situations in garnishment law, but is now almost exclusively found in the law of partnerships, and more recently limited liability companies (\"LLCs\"). Yet, in the area of LLCs, the charging order has taken on a life and aura of its own, with some states racing each other to have the \"best\" charging order provisions, so as to foster entity formation and registered agents business within those states. Creditors at the same time, while of course describing the \"race\" in less than flattering terms, have been developing their own strategies for defeating or circumventing the much-ballyhooed \"exclusivity\" of the charging order remedy. To understand why this unique remedy even exists, and why it has graced or cursed the area of partnership and LLC law, we must retrace the history of Anglo-American law to where a fork in the road developed in how each country would handle security interests that were created by creditor claims. The lien was not a part of the English Common Law. Instead, it was first suggested in 1791 in the fonn of a \"Mechanic's Lien\" by Thomas Jefferson as a means to further the construction of the District of Columbia. After adoption by the Maryland legislature that same year, the concept quickly spread to other states. (2) The concept was not a particularly new one; the Romans had, centuries before, developed the concept of the obligare rem, by which a creditor took an interest in a pignus (the object of a security interest) to secure a debt. The Roman security interest had survived into the civil law of the continental European states, of which the Francophile attorney Jefferson was likely aware. Now we have materialman's liens, tax liens, mortgage liens, attorney's liens, mineral liens, maritime liens, warehouser's liens, HOA liens, municipal liens, UCC liens, judgment liens (of which the charging order lien is but one), and the list goes on and on. Thanks to our third president, America has become the land of the free and the brave, and the lien. While America went the way of the lien, the United Kingdom, instead, adopted the notion of the charging order to the same effect. That a debtor's interest in shares of stock could be \"charged\" was formalized in the first two Acts of Queen Victoria. 1. Judgments Act of 1838 XIV. Stock and shares in public funds and public companies belonging to the debtor, and standing in his own name, to be charged by order of a judge. And be it enacted, that if any person against whom any judgment shall have been entered up in any of her Majesty's Superior Courts at Westminster shall have any government stock, funds, or annuities, or any stock or shares of or in any public Company in England (whether incorporated or not), standing in his name in his own right, or in the name of any person in trust for him, it shall be lawful for a judge of one of the Superior Courts, on the application of any judgment creditor, to order that such stock, funds, annuities, or shares, or such of them or such part thereof respectively as he shall think fit, shall stand charged with the payment of the amount for which judgment shall have been so recovered, and interest thereon, and such order shall entitle the judgment creditor to all such remedies as he would have been entitled to if such charge had been made in his favour by the judgment debtor; provided that no proceedings shall be taken to have the benefit of such charge until after the expiration of six calendar months from the date of such order. (3) Thus, under United Kingdom law, the method for a judgment creditor to create and maintain a legal interest on the debtor's property was through the vehicle of the charging order. When the United Kingdom codified its partnership law in 1890, the charging order was thus the natural and accepted method of achieving that end. …","PeriodicalId":82749,"journal":{"name":"South Dakota law review","volume":"61 1","pages":"440"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South Dakota law review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2928487","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

I. INTRODUCTION: HISTORY OF THE "PECULIAR MECHANISM" (1) The charging order is an oddity of American law, occasionally appearing in old opinions pre-dating World War I to address odd situations in garnishment law, but is now almost exclusively found in the law of partnerships, and more recently limited liability companies ("LLCs"). Yet, in the area of LLCs, the charging order has taken on a life and aura of its own, with some states racing each other to have the "best" charging order provisions, so as to foster entity formation and registered agents business within those states. Creditors at the same time, while of course describing the "race" in less than flattering terms, have been developing their own strategies for defeating or circumventing the much-ballyhooed "exclusivity" of the charging order remedy. To understand why this unique remedy even exists, and why it has graced or cursed the area of partnership and LLC law, we must retrace the history of Anglo-American law to where a fork in the road developed in how each country would handle security interests that were created by creditor claims. The lien was not a part of the English Common Law. Instead, it was first suggested in 1791 in the fonn of a "Mechanic's Lien" by Thomas Jefferson as a means to further the construction of the District of Columbia. After adoption by the Maryland legislature that same year, the concept quickly spread to other states. (2) The concept was not a particularly new one; the Romans had, centuries before, developed the concept of the obligare rem, by which a creditor took an interest in a pignus (the object of a security interest) to secure a debt. The Roman security interest had survived into the civil law of the continental European states, of which the Francophile attorney Jefferson was likely aware. Now we have materialman's liens, tax liens, mortgage liens, attorney's liens, mineral liens, maritime liens, warehouser's liens, HOA liens, municipal liens, UCC liens, judgment liens (of which the charging order lien is but one), and the list goes on and on. Thanks to our third president, America has become the land of the free and the brave, and the lien. While America went the way of the lien, the United Kingdom, instead, adopted the notion of the charging order to the same effect. That a debtor's interest in shares of stock could be "charged" was formalized in the first two Acts of Queen Victoria. 1. Judgments Act of 1838 XIV. Stock and shares in public funds and public companies belonging to the debtor, and standing in his own name, to be charged by order of a judge. And be it enacted, that if any person against whom any judgment shall have been entered up in any of her Majesty's Superior Courts at Westminster shall have any government stock, funds, or annuities, or any stock or shares of or in any public Company in England (whether incorporated or not), standing in his name in his own right, or in the name of any person in trust for him, it shall be lawful for a judge of one of the Superior Courts, on the application of any judgment creditor, to order that such stock, funds, annuities, or shares, or such of them or such part thereof respectively as he shall think fit, shall stand charged with the payment of the amount for which judgment shall have been so recovered, and interest thereon, and such order shall entitle the judgment creditor to all such remedies as he would have been entitled to if such charge had been made in his favour by the judgment debtor; provided that no proceedings shall be taken to have the benefit of such charge until after the expiration of six calendar months from the date of such order. (3) Thus, under United Kingdom law, the method for a judgment creditor to create and maintain a legal interest on the debtor's property was through the vehicle of the charging order. When the United Kingdom codified its partnership law in 1890, the charging order was thus the natural and accepted method of achieving that end. …
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
收费命令:特殊的机制
(1)扣押令是美国法律的一种奇怪现象,偶尔出现在第一次世界大战之前的旧意见中,以解决罚没法中的奇怪情况,但现在几乎只出现在合伙企业的法律中,以及最近的有限责任公司(“llc”)。然而,在有限责任公司领域,收费令已经有了自己的生命和光环,一些州竞相拥有“最好”的收费令规定,以促进这些州的实体形成和注册代理业务。与此同时,债权人在用不那么讨好的措辞描述这场“竞赛”的同时,也一直在制定自己的策略,以挫败或规避被大肆宣传的起诉令补救措施的“排他性”。要理解为什么这种独特的救济存在,以及为什么它使合伙企业和有限责任公司法律领域蒙受或受到诅咒,我们必须追溯英美法系的历史,追溯到每个国家如何处理由债权人债权产生的担保权益的岔路口。留置权不是英国普通法的一部分。1791年,托马斯·杰斐逊(Thomas Jefferson)以“机械师留置权”(Mechanic’s Lien)的名义首次提出,作为进一步建设哥伦比亚特区的一种手段。在同年被马里兰州立法机关采纳后,这一概念迅速传播到其他州。(2)这个概念并不特别新;罗马人在几个世纪以前就发展出了“有义务物权”的概念,即债权人对pignus(担保物权的对象)持有利益以担保债务。罗马的安全利益已经延续到欧洲大陆各国的民法中,这一点亲法律师杰斐逊可能是知道的。现在我们有物资留置权、税务留置权、抵押留置权、律师留置权、矿产留置权、海事留置权、仓库留置权、HOA留置权、市政留置权、UCC留置权、判决留置权(其中押记令留置权只是其中之一),而且这个名单还在不断增加。感谢我们的第三任总统,美国已经成为自由、勇敢和自由的国度。当美国走上留置权的道路时,英国却采用了扣押令的概念来达到同样的效果。在维多利亚女王的前两部法案中,债务人在股票中的权益可以被“收费”。1838年判决法以债务人个人名义持有的属于债务人的公共基金和公共公司的股票和股份,根据法官的命令予以扣押。并被实施,如果任何被判断应当已经进入了陛下的上级法院在威斯敏斯特应当有任何政府证券,基金,或年金,或任何股票或或任何上市公司的股票在英格兰(是否合并),站在他的名字在他自己的权利,或在信任任何人的名字对他来说,应当合法上级法院的一名法官,在应用程序的任何判定债权人,命令他认为合适的股票、基金、年金或股份,或其中的某一部分或其中的某一部分,被要求支付判决书所收回的金额及其利息,而该命令使判决债权人有权获得如判决债务人作出对他有利的指控时他有权获得的一切救济;但在该命令发出之日起六个日历月届满之前,不得为享有该项押记的利益而提起诉讼。(3)因此,根据联合王国的法律,判决债权人对债务人的财产建立和维持法定权益的方法是通过押记令这一工具。当英国于1890年编纂其合伙企业法时,收费令因此成为实现这一目标的自然和公认的方法。...
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Sex, Drugs, and Rock 'N' Roll: Some Observations of Life on a Trial Team Homestead: A (New) Hope Charging Orders: The Peculiar Mechanism A Bone to Pick: Applying a Best Interest of the Family Standard in Pet Custody Disputes Storytelling for Lawyers
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1