C
cmlewis
Guest
What is the name of your state? Illinois
My partner and I are conducting a judgment recovery business in Northern Illinois. We have recently run into a road block at our local courthouse in that the chief judge is telling us we need to start a new judgment, when in fact, the nature of our business is that we become the owner of the judgment from the original judgment creditor by filing an acknowledgment of assignment with the court. The judge currently won't let us continue filing our wage garnishments etc. and has told us (through the clerks) if we want to talk to him to get an attorney and set a court date. I am looking at the Illinois Civil Procedure 735 ILCS 5/2-1402 which states "A judgment creditor, OR HIS OR HER SUCCESSOR in interest when that interest is made to appear of record, is entitled to prosecute supplementary proceedings for the purposes ..." Am I reading this right that an OJC in Illinois has the right to "sell" his or her judgment and then that person or d/b/a is now the official "owner" of the judgment and should be able to enforce it by legal means as the OJC would have?
My partner and I are conducting a judgment recovery business in Northern Illinois. We have recently run into a road block at our local courthouse in that the chief judge is telling us we need to start a new judgment, when in fact, the nature of our business is that we become the owner of the judgment from the original judgment creditor by filing an acknowledgment of assignment with the court. The judge currently won't let us continue filing our wage garnishments etc. and has told us (through the clerks) if we want to talk to him to get an attorney and set a court date. I am looking at the Illinois Civil Procedure 735 ILCS 5/2-1402 which states "A judgment creditor, OR HIS OR HER SUCCESSOR in interest when that interest is made to appear of record, is entitled to prosecute supplementary proceedings for the purposes ..." Am I reading this right that an OJC in Illinois has the right to "sell" his or her judgment and then that person or d/b/a is now the official "owner" of the judgment and should be able to enforce it by legal means as the OJC would have?
