Summary
The Utah Supreme Court affirmed dismissal of claims that Dr. Wade Lee Hill purchased at a constable's sale pursuant to a writ of execution. The court held that causes of action are choses in action subject to execution under Utah Rule of Civil Procedure 69(f), and that a nonlawyer judgment creditor may purchase claims pending against himself and move to dismiss them. The court declined to extend the public-policy exception recognized for lawyers purchasing legal-malpractice claims against themselves.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether a judgment creditor may levy upon and purchase a judgment debtor's pending causes of action at a constable's sale under Utah Rule of Civil Procedure 69(f).
- Whether a defendant may purchase claims pending against itself at an execution sale and then move to dismiss those claims.
- Whether applying Utah Rule of Civil Procedure 69(f) in this manner violated the open courts provision of article I, section 11 of the Utah Constitution.
- Whether the public-policy exception recognized for lawyers in Snow, Nuffer, Engstrom & Drake v. Tanasse should be extended to nonlawyer judgment creditors.
Holdings
- A judgment creditor may levy upon and purchase a judgment debtor's nonexempt choses in action at a sheriff's or constable's sale under Utah Rule of Civil Procedure 69(f).
- A nonlawyer defendant who purchases claims pending against itself at a constable's sale may move to dismiss those claims.
- Allowing a defendant to purchase claims pending against itself at an execution sale does not violate article I, section 11 of the Utah Constitution.
Key quotations
“Under the open courts provision, there is no appreciable difference between a defendant purchasing claims against itself and another purchasing those claims.” (¶ 17)
“We hold that Dr. Hill legally purchased claims pending against himself and then moved to dismiss those claims.” (¶ 22)
Factual background
Heritage Management Trust held shares in Applied Medical Technologies on behalf of Ronald Eames. After Dr. Wade Lee Hill obtained a deficiency judgment against Heritage Trust, a writ of execution was issued and a constable levied on the trust's nonexempt property, including its pending claims in consolidated litigation against Hill and Applied Medical. Hill purchased those claims at the constable's sale and moved to dismiss them.
Procedural history
Applied Medical filed a declaratory-relief action concerning dissenter's rights, stock valuation, and bankruptcy issues. Heritage Trust and related parties filed separate claims concerning Applied Medical stock and other conduct, and the matters were consolidated. After a constable levied on and sold Heritage Trust's pending claims to Dr. Hill, the trial court dismissed those claims; the Utah Supreme Court affirmed.