Hudson United Bank v. Feld, et al.
(E.D. Pa. 2004)

In this case, BLF attorney A. Richard Feldman utilized several aspects of the Pennsylvania and New Jersey collection law to maximize recovery for BLF's client, Hudson United Bank (the "Bank").

Defendant, David Feld, defaulted on a multi-million dollar commercial loan extended by the Bank. BLF, on behalf of the Bank, filed a lawsuit to collect on the loan. The lawsuit resulted in a judgment in the full amount in favor of the Bank, but the judgment debtor professed to have no funds to satisfy it.

BLF’s investigation, however, revealed that the debtor owned real estate in New Jersey and, in addition, held a controlling interest in several real estate partnerships. One of the partnerships was located in Pennsylvania and BLF obtained an order permitting it to sell the debtor’s interest in that partnership. Another partnership was located in New Jersey, and BLF obtained a charging lien on the judgment debtor’s interest in that partnership. Moreover, when debtor claimed that the New Jersey partnership was losing money and none was available to satisfy the Bank’s charging lien, the New Jersey federal court, on BLF’s application, appointed a receiver for that partnership. BLF also recorded the judgment in New Jersey, so that it became a lien against all debtor’s real estate.

In the end the debtor settled all his disputes with the Bank by making a payment which satisfied in substantial part the Bank’s judgment. Hudson United Bank v. Feld, et al., No. 02-996 (E.D. Pa. 2004).

© 2018 Bazelon Less & Feldman, P.C. All rights reserved.