Wolcott v. Quick

Finan, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. On December 27, 1965, Norman H. Wolcott (appellant) obtained judgment in the Circuit Court for Howard County, in a suit for fraudulent conversion, against Mitchell Quick (appellee) in the amount of $17,000.00 with interest from that date and costs. This judgment was the result of the jury awarding actual damages of $2,000.00 and punitive damages in the amount of $15,000.00. On December 29, 1965, that judgment was entered in Montgomery County, the case having previously been transferred to Howard County for trial.

Two years went by with no payment being made by the appellee on the judgment against him. Finally, on March 29, 1968, appellant petitioned for and was granted supplementary proceedings against appellee. (Maryland Rule 628 a 1.) On April 26, 1968, examination was made of the appellee whose testimony in sum was, that due to a fire at his residence all of his financial records had been destroyed, and he was unable to file state and federal income tax returns for the years 1965, 1966 ond 1967; that he had been in the second deed of trust business but left it over two years ago and had been employed by five different home improvement firms within the past year. He further stated that he had no checking or savings accounts, no securities of any kind and that all the money he had was $2.00 in cash.

He also testified that he lived in a one bedroom apartment for which he paid rent of $146.00 per month and that it was furnished with his wife’s furniture; that he had no car but that one was titled in his wife’s name. There was testimony that his wife had forty shares of stock in a corporation which he had organized; that he had one share; and that he claimed the corporation to be inactive. On June 26, 1968, the appellant petitioned for the appointment of a receiver for the judgment debtor’s assets pursuant to Maryland Rule 628 d. The lower court refused to grant this relief stating: “This case terminated on December 29, 1965, therefore it is not open for the determination of a receiver ⁵⁴⁵ ship proceeding which should be filed on the Equity side of this Court.

Court therefore refuses to sign the above order. Dated this 1st day of July, 1968.” It is the correctness of this ruling of the lower court that is before us on appeal. Maryland .Rule 628 titled “Judgment,” subtitled “Supplementary Proceedings,” was intended for use in perfecting an attachment or execution upon a lien or judgment properly recorded in Baltimore City or any county of this State. Rule 628 a in part provides : “Rule 628.

Supplementary Proceedings, a. When, Where and How Brought. 1. When Examination May Be Had. At any time within which an attachment or execution might issue upon judgment, or a recorded lien of the State of Maryland or the