Texas collections in federal court intimidates some lawyers. But you cannot be afraid of federal court.

Texas collections in federal court: This is another case where a lawyer obtained a judgment and was then unable to collect the judgment.

In this case the prior lawyer obtained a judgment for unpaid overtime wages against a tow truck company in Dallas Federal court. But navigating collections in federal court is even more complicated than Texas state court.

Frequently, lawyers are able to obtain a judgment in federal court, but collecting judgments in federal court is not something most lawyers have actually had to do.

Once retained, we performed our usual investigation into the debtor. From the documents it was clear the debtor’s only assets worthy of our efforts were the tow trucks and related equipment, like jacks. So we went directly to a motion for turnover ordering the debtor tow truck company to turn over all of their equipment.

the federal judge moved quickly to grant the motion and issued an order for turnover.

One difference in a state court turnover and a turnover in federal court is the level of involvement between a sheriff in state court and a marshal in federal court. In the case the U.S. Marshals were proactive and once they arrived at the debtor’s place of business looking for the tow trucks we were able to settle with the tow truck company on very favorable terms. As you might expect.

Texas collections lawyers need to be prepared to go trial.

The client was in the business of closing loans for mortgage companies. He was paid a flat fee for each loan that he closed. During a difficult period in his life (including a mother passing away) he was distracted and failed to bill a significant number of closings.

After doing everything he could to collect this debt on his own, he found his way to us.

From the very beginning the debtor was clear that nothing would ever be paid. Trial seemed inevitable.

So many lawyers seem to assume the case will settle and fail to work it up for trial. But we find that preparing a case for trial is the most intimidating thing you can do to opposing counsel. As a result, we prepare every case as though it is going to trial. So this case was not particularly difficult for us.

Opposing counsel began making tiny offers in the weeks before tria hoping we would see them as lifelines. But since we were ready for trial, we weren’t interested. At trial we won everything we asked the judge to give us.

Yet again, preparation is shown to be the most important factor to success at trial.

An international company based in California obtained a multi million dollar judgment after a two-week trial against an individual who had defaulted on some obligations related to some real estate investment vehicles promoted by the client.

Assistant General Counsel in charge of the case needed lawyers that were experts in post judgment matters and fraudulent transfers. We were retained shortly after the judgment was obtained.

Gregory Ducas is a 57 year old commercial airline pilot that has been employed by United Airlines for 30 years. He was selected as a juror in one of our cases that was set to go to trial for three days. However, Mr. Ducas apparently did not care to serve on the panel. Although he had several opportunities to tell the lawyers and the judge that he would have trouble being fair and impartial, he remained silent.

We represent a large insurance company that provides group health insurance to large employers.  Recently, we went to trial on a case for them where the defendant, an employer of approximately 500 people, alleged that our client failed to properly handle claims and to properly debit the account of the defendant for premiums.