United States District Court, M.D. Louisiana
BARNHART CRANE AND RIGGING CO.
NEW GREEN LEGACY SERVICES SHREVEPORT, LLC, ET AL NO.-EWD
WILDER-DOOMES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
the Court is a Motion for Writ of Garnishment, filed by
Barnhart Crane and Rigging Company
(“Barnhart”). The Motion is not opposed.
Motion for Writ of Garnishment, Barnhart asserts that it is a
judgment creditor of the defendants, New Green Legacy
Services, Inc. and New Green Legacy Services Shreveport, LLC
(collectively, “New Green”), by virtue of a
Default Judgment entered by the United States District Court
for the Western District of Tennessee. Pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1963, Barnhart registered the Default Judgment
in this Court on March 16, 2017. In the Motion for Writ of
Garnishment, Barnhart asserts that it has learned Entergy
Gulf States Louisiana, L.L.C. (“Entergy”) is
holding funds that are payable to New Green pursuant to a
contract between Entergy and New Green. To execute the
Default Judgment, Barnhart seeks, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 69
and La. Code Civ. P. arts. 2411-2417, an order from this
Court directing the Clerk of Court to issue a writ of
garnishment directing Entergy to declare under oath in what
amount it is indebted to New Green Legacy Services, Inc.
and/or New Green Legacy Services Shreveport, LLC, and
directing the United States Marshal to serve the writ of
garnishment on Entergy through its registered agent for
service of process.
LAW AND ANALYSIS
Rule of Civil Procedure 69(a) provides that, “A money
judgment is enforced by a writ of execution, unless the court
directs otherwise.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 69(a)(1). Rule
69(a)(1) further provides that, “The procedure on
execution - and in proceedings supplementary to and in aid of
judgment or execution - must accord with the procedure of the
state where the court is located, but a federal statute
governs to the extent it applies.” Id.
According to Rule 69(a)(2), “In aid of the judgment or
execution, the judgment creditor or a successor in interest
whose interest appears of record may obtain discovery from
any person - including the judgment debtor - as provided in
these rules or by the procedure of the state where the court
is located.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 69(a)(2).
Louisiana law, “A judgment for the payment of money may
be executed by a writ of fieri facias directing the
seizure and sale of property of the judgment debtor.”
La. Code Civ. P. art. 2291. Louisiana law authorizes
garnishment following the issuance of a writ of fieri
facias. According to La. Code Civ. P. art. 2411(A):
The judgment creditor, by petition and after the issuance
of a writ of fieri facias, may cause a third person to
be cited as a garnishee to declare under oath what property
he has in his possession or under his control belonging to
the judgment debtor and in what amount he is indebted to him,
even though the debt may not be due. He may require the third
person to answer categorically and under oath the
interrogatories annexed to the petition within the delay
provided by Article 2412.
La. Code Civ. P. art. 2411(A) (emphasis added).
the clear language of La. Code Civ. P. art. 2411(A), Barnhart
has not submitted any evidence to show that a writ of
fieri facias or writ of execution has been issued,
by this Court or the United States District Court for the
Western District of Tennessee, prior to filing the instant
Motion for Writ of Garnishment. Cases from the federal
district courts in Louisiana show that a writ of garnishment
is generally issued simultaneously with the issuance of a
writ of fieri facias or writ of execution, or
thereafter. The Court is unaware of any cases wherein
a Louisiana federal district court has issued a writ of
garnishment prior to the issuance of a writ of fieri
facias or writ of execution, and Barnhart has not
directed the Court to any such cases.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within twenty-one (21) days of the
date of this Order, Barnhart shall file the following
documentation into the record in this matter: (1)
documentation evidencing that Barnhart obtained a writ of
fieri facias or writ of execution prior to filing
its Motion for Writ of Garnishment,  as required by La. Code Civ.
P. art. 2411(A) and applicable case law; or, alternatively,
(2) supplemental briefing regarding why Barnhart was not
required to obtain a writ of fieri facias or writ of
execution prior to filing the Motion for Writ of Garnishment;
or, alternatively, (3) supplemental briefing requesting a
writ of fieri facias or writ of execution from this
Court. The supplemental memoranda shall be limited to ten
 R. Doc. 2.