Pojanowski v. Loscalzo
| Decision Date | 06 April 1992 |
| Citation | 603 A.2d 952,127 N.J. 240 |
| Parties | Joseph A. POJANOWSKI, III, Esq., Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Mary LOSCALZO and Frances Terranova, Defendants-Appellants. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Kenneth C. McBroom, for defendants-appellants (Schepisi & McLaughlin, attorneys).
Tara P. D'Amato, for plaintiff-respondent (Joseph A. Pojanowski, III, attorney; Joseph A. Pojanowski and Eugene P. Maguire, on the brief).
In this case, the Chancery Division ordered defendant Mary Loscalzo to pay a default judgment entered against her by plaintiff, Joseph Pojanowski, III, Esq. for legal services rendered on her behalf. It further ordered that real estate, an income-producing multi-family house in which she and her daughter, defendant Frances Terranova, resided, be sold at public auction in the event she did not comply. The Chancery Division found that the real estate had been fraudulently conveyed by the mother to the daughter. The Appellate Division upheld the Chancery Division's rulings. We hereby affirm the judgment below substantially for the reasons set forth in the unpublished opinion of the Appellate Division.
Defendants contend that the Chancery Division's order was invalid because plaintiff did not make a diligent attempt to locate Mrs. Loscalzo's personal property as required by N.J.S.A. 2A:17-1 before he obtained an order authorizing the sale of her real estate. We concur in the determination of the lower courts that under the circumstances plaintiff complied with N.J.S.A. 2A:17-1 in that he made reasonable efforts to determine whether defendant Loscalzo had personal assets under Rule 4:59-1(e). He filed a motion to compel the post-judgment deposition of Mrs. Loscalzo in order to ascertain the extent and location of her assets. Plaintiff's attorney inquired about whether she had any checking account, stocks, bonds, property, any income other than social security, any pensions, and whether she received money from any source. Loscalzo responded negatively or evasively to all of those inquiries. The Appellate Division is clearly supported by the record in determining that "[t]here can be no question but that she is insolvent, based on her own testimony, without any personal property to levy upon."
There is ample justification for the court's finding that plaintiff made a good faith effort to discover defendant Loscalzo's personal property. Furthermore, that defendant does not suggest that if an additional inquiry were mounted to find personal assets belonging to her, or if a writ of execution were issued to direct the sheriff to levy on personal assets, a different result would obtain. Defendant Loscalzo has not budged...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Catalano
...did not make a good faith effort to locate the debtors’ personal property and therefore the levy was void. Id. In Pojanowski v. Loscalzo, 127 N.J. 240, 242, 603 A.2d 952 (1992), the plaintiff filed a motion to compel a post-judgment deposition of the defendant in attempt to ascertain the ex......
-
In re Mariano
...the location of the debtor's personalty" was more recently addressed by the New Jersey Supreme Court in Pojanowski v. Loscalzo, 127 N.J. 240, 242, 603 A.2d 952, 953 (1992). The Pojanowski court restated the mandate of N.J.S.A. § 2A:17-1 to require that the creditor must exert "reasonable ef......
-
Straffi v. Ameris Bank (In re Hillesland)
...debtor responded negatively or evasively to the questions constituted a good faith effort to discover personalty. Pojanowski v. Loscalzo,, 127 N.J. 240, 242 (1992). Similarly, in In re Mariano, the court found that the information certified to in an information subpoena had the same import ......
-
Toth v. Turi
...result would obtain" and plaintiff could recover the amount of her judgment, or some significant part of it. Pojanowski v. Loscalzo, 127 N.J. 240, 242 (1992). We have already addressed defendant's argument as to the invalidity of the writ of execution. We find no support in the record for d......