North Shore University Hospital v. Citibank Legal Service Intake Unit

25 Misc. 3d 655
CourtNew York District Court
DecidedAugust 4, 2009
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 25 Misc. 3d 655 (North Shore University Hospital v. Citibank Legal Service Intake Unit) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York District Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
North Shore University Hospital v. Citibank Legal Service Intake Unit, 25 Misc. 3d 655 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 2009).

Opinion

[656]*656OPINION OF THE COURT

Fred J. Hirsh, J.

Petitioner judgment creditor North Shore University Hospital at Plainview (NSUHP) commenced this special proceeding seeking a turnover order.

Background

This special proceeding raises issues not specifically addressed in CPLR 5222-a and the interrelationship among CPLR 5222-a, 5225 (b) and 5227. More specifically, does a judgment creditor have to plead and prove compliance with CPLR 5222-a before commencing a turnover proceeding, and can a judgment creditor commence a turnover proceeding before the time for a judgment debtor to claim the funds on deposit in a bank account which are exempt from restraint and/or execution pursuant to CPLR 5222-a has expired?

On February 5, 2009, NSUHP entered a judgment against Kim Miscioscia in the sum of $5,262.24. The judgment remains wholly unsatisfied.

In an effort to obtain information that would permit NSUHP to enforce the judgment, NSUHP attorneys served an information subpoena and restraining notice on Citibank (Bank). Bank responded to the information subpoena by advising NSUHP’s attorneys that Miscioscia maintains a bank account with Bank jointly with Loretta H. LaRosa. Bank’s response to the information subpoena is dated March 19, 2009.

The amount on deposit in the account is sufficient to fully satisfy the judgment.

NSUHP commenced this turnover proceeding on April 1, 2009 seeking an order directing Bank to turn over from the account maintained by Miscioscia and LaRosa an amount sufficient to satisfy the judgment.

NSUHP has not alleged or proved that it has complied with CPLR 5222-a, which requires a judgment creditor who serves a restraining notice on a bank to serve with the restraining notice an exemption notice in the form prescribed by CPLR 5222-a (b) (4) (a) and two copies of an exemption claim form in the form prescribed by CPLR 5222-a (b) (4) (b). NSUHP has failed to attach a copy of the information subpoena or restraining notice it served upon Bank to its motion papers. NSUHP does not indicate the date upon which the restraining notice or information subpoena was served upon Bank.

[657]*657Although Miscioscia and LaRosa were duly served with the notice of petition and petition in the turnover proceeding, they did not appear on the return date or oppose the application for a turnover order.

Discussion

CPLR 5225 (b) permits a judgment creditor to commence a special proceeding against a person in possession or custody of money in which the judgment debtor has an interest seeking to compel the person who is in possession of the money in which the judgment debtor has an interest to pay the money over to the judgment creditor in full or partial satisfaction of the judgment.

CPLR article 52 was amended by Laws of 2008 (ch 575). These amendments, which became effective January 1, 2009, provide significant new substantive and procedural protections to judgment debtors. (See Johnson M. Tyler, Outside Counsel, Exempt Income Protection Act Better Protects Strapped Debtors, NYLJ, Jan. 27, 2009, at 4, col 1.)

CPLR 5222-a requires an attorney who serves a restraining notice on a bank to serve upon the bank together with the restraining notice an exemption notice and two exemption claim forms titled “ADDRESS A” and “ADDRESS B.” (CPLR 5222-a [b] [1].) The exemption notice and exemption claim form must be in the statutorily prescribed form set forth in CPLR 5222-a (b) (4).

Within two days of receipt of the restraining notice, exemption notice and exemption claim forms, the bank must mail a copy of the restraining notice, the exemption notice and two copies of the exemption claim form to the judgment debtor by first-class mail addressed to the judgment debtor at the judgment debtor’s last known address. (CPLR 5222-a [b] [3].)

The exemption notice advises the judgment debtor that his or her bank account is being restrained or “frozen.” The exemption notice also advises the judgment debtor that if the funds on deposit in the restrained bank account contain Social Security benefits, Social Security disability benefits, supplemental security income (SSI), public assistance (welfare), income earned while receiving SSI or public assistance, veterans’ benefits, unemployment insurance, payments from pensions and retirement accounts, disability benefits, income earned in the last 60 days (90% of which is exempt), workers’ compensation benefits, child support, spousal support or maintenance (alimony), [658]*658railroad retirement and/or black lung benefits, the money is exempt from restraint and cannot be taken by the judgment creditor to satisfy the judgment. The exemption notice advises the judgment debtor that to claim the exemption, the judgment debtor should complete the exemption claim form and deliver or mail it to the bank in which the restrained account is maintained and the judgment creditor or the judgment creditor’s attorney within 20 days of the postmark date on the envelope holding the exemption notice. (CPLR 5222-a [b] [4] [a].) The exemption notice advises a judgment debtor that providing written or documentary proof of the claimed exemption to the judgment creditor’s attorney with the exemption claim form may result in the funds being unfrozen faster. (CPLR 5222-a [b] [4] [a].) The exemption notice advises the judgment debtor that if he or she sends the judgment creditor’s attorney proof the funds are exempt, the judgment creditor’s attorney must release or unfreeze the account. (Id.)

If the judgment debtor mails a copy of the exemption claim form to the judgment creditor or the judgment creditor’s attorney within 20 days of the postmark date on the envelope containing the exemption notice and exemption claim form (CPLR 5222-a [c] [1]) together with proof establishing the funds in the bank account are exempt from execution, the judgment creditor shall, within seven days of the postmark date on the envelope containing the exemption claim form, advise the bank to release the account. (CPLR 5222-a [c] [4].) If the exemption claim form and proof establish the restrained account contains exempt and nonexempt funds, the judgment creditor shall advise the bank to release the exempt funds. (Id.)

A bank that receives an exemption claim form is required to notify the judgment creditor forthwith that it is going to release all funds in the judgment debtor’s account from restraint within eight days after the date postmarked on the envelope containing the executed exemption claim form or eight days after personal delivery of the exemption claim form to the bank unless the judgment creditor files an objection. (CPLR 5222-a [c] [2], [3].)

A judgment creditor can object to the judgment debtor’s claim of exemption by moving to challenge the claimed exemption within eight days of the date postmarked on the envelope containing the executed exemption claim form or within eight days of personal delivery of the exemption claim form. (CPLR 5222-a [d].) The motion must be returnable seven days after the [659]*659date of service. The affidavit or affirmation submitted in support of such a motion must state a reasonable factual basis for its claim the funds are not exempt and the amount of the funds the judgment creditor believes are not exempt. In a motion made to contest the claimed exemption, the executed exemption claim form is prima facie evidence the funds are exempt.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Distressed Holdings, LLC v. Ehrler
113 A.D.3d 111 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
LR Credit 21, LLC v. Burnett
40 Misc. 3d 854 (Nassau County District Court, 2013)
Cruz v. TD Bank, N.A.
855 F. Supp. 2d 157 (S.D. New York, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
25 Misc. 3d 655, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/north-shore-university-hospital-v-citibank-legal-service-intake-unit-nydistct-2009.