Atlantic Mobile Homes, Inc. v. LeFever
481 So. 2d 1002, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 295 (1986)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under Florida's Uniform Partnership Act, a judgment creditor of an individual partner cannot attach or liquidate the partner's interest in specific partnership property; the creditor's exclusive remedy is to obtain a charging order against the partner's share of partnership profits.
Facts:
- Robert C. LeFever, George J. Krause, and Joe C. Clark obtained money judgments against a corporation named Florida Mobile Home Communities, Inc. (FMHC).
- FMHC was a co-partner with Atlantic Mobile Homes, Inc. in a New York partnership.
- This partnership owned two other entities, Florida Atlantic Associates and Florida Atlantic Associates Number 2.
- Atlantic Mobile Homes, Inc. and the two subsidiary entities were not parties to the original lawsuit in which the judgments against FMHC were obtained.
Procedural Posture:
- Robert C. LeFever, George J. Krause, and Joe C. Clark (respondents) obtained money judgments against Florida Mobile Home Communities, Inc. (FMHC) in a Florida trial court.
- The trial court issued an order giving FMHC's partners thirty days to pay FMHC's debt.
- The order further authorized the respondents to petition for the liquidation of FMHC's assets, including its interest in the partnership, if the debt remained unpaid.
- FMHC's partners, Atlantic Mobile Homes, Inc., Florida Atlantic Associates, and Florida Atlantic Associates, Number Two (petitioners), sought a writ of certiorari from the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District, to quash the trial court's order.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does Florida law permit a judgment creditor of an individual corporate partner to attach and liquidate that partner's interest in specific partnership assets without suing the partnership or obtaining a statutory charging order?
Opinions:
Majority - Per Curiam
No. A judgment creditor cannot attach and liquidate a partner's interest in partnership assets to satisfy a judgment against the partner individually. Florida has adopted the Uniform Partnership Act (UPA), which provides the exclusive remedy for a judgment creditor against a debtor-partner. Under section 620.68(2)(c) of the Florida Statutes, a partner's right in specific partnership property is not subject to attachment for a partner's individual debt. The sole recourse for the creditor is to obtain a 'charging order' under section 620.695, which only allows the creditor to receive the debtor's share of profits from the partnership, not to seize the underlying partnership assets themselves. The trial court erred by applying a general corporate liquidation statute instead of the specific partnership statutes that govern this situation.
Analysis:
This decision firmly establishes the charging order as the exclusive remedy for creditors of an individual partner in Florida, reinforcing the 'entity theory' of partnership law. By treating the partnership as a distinct legal entity, the ruling protects the partnership's assets and operational stability from the personal debts of its individual members. This precedent shields non-debtor partners from having the partnership business dismantled to satisfy a co-partner's obligations, thereby promoting business continuity. It clarifies for creditors that they cannot circumvent partnership law by using general corporate collection statutes to reach specific partnership assets.
