Lambland, Inc. v. Heartland Biogas, LLC et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Raymond P. Moore
Civil Action No. 18-cv-01060-RM-KLM
LAMBLAND, INC. d/b/a A-1 Organics, Inc., a Colorado corporation,
Plaintiff,
v.
HEARTLAND BIOGAS, LLC, a Denver limited liability company,
Defendant.
______________________________________________________________________________
ORDER
______________________________________________________________________________
Before the Court are Plaintiff’s Motion for Writ of Execution (ECF No. 317) and Motion
to Impose a Judgment Lien (ECF No. 318). The Motions have been fully briefed (ECF Nos.
319, 320, 323, 324) and are granted for the reasons below.
A nine-million-dollar judgment, which continues to accrue interest, was entered against
Defendant on May 18, 2022. Although Defendant has appealed the matter to the United States
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, it has neither satisfied the judgment nor posted a
supersedeas bond. Meanwhile, Defendant is prosecuting a related civil action against the
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment and the Board of County
Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado in state court. Plaintiff seeks a writ of execution to
enforce the judgment as well as a judgment lien on any proceeds Defendant obtains in the state
court action.
Case No. 1:18-cv-01060-RM-NRN Document 325 filed 11/01/22 USDC Colorado
pg 1 of 3

2
“Generally, the first step in enforcing a money judgment is to obtain a writ of execution.”
RMA Ventures Cal. v. Sun America Life Ins. Co., 576 F.3d 1070, 1074 (10th Cir. 2009). Under
Fed. R. Civ. P. 69(a), “[a] money judgment is enforced by a writ of execution, unless the court
directs otherwise,” according to the procedure of the state where the court is located. Under
Colorado law, the court may order a party “to apply any property other than real property, not
exempt from execution, whether in the possession of such party or other person, or owed the
judgment debtor, towards satisfaction of the judgment.” C.R.C.P. 69(g). In addition, Colorado
courts recognize that a chose in action is personal property that can be levied. See AA Wholesale
Storage, LLC v. Swinyard, 488 P.3d 1213, 1219 n.5 (Colo. App. 2021); see id. at 1219 (noting
that C.R.C.P. 69 has been interpreted liberally to assist judgment creditors in enforcing final
money judgments). “Though a judgment creditor may obtain a judgment lien and an execution
lien, they are independent statutory liens.” Franklin Credit Mgmt. Corp. v. Galvan, 457 P.3d
749, 753 (Colo. App. 2019).
The Court finds each of Plaintiff’s Motions has merit. Having obtained its judgment
more than five months ago, Plaintiff is not required to wait indefinitely for Defendant to pay,
notwithstanding the fact that Defendant has filed an appeal and “expects the Tenth Circuit to
issue a decision within the next twelve months.” (ECF No. 319 at 4.) Nor does this case present
circumstances in which Defendant is likely to prosecute its state court action with less vigor
because some potential proceeds could ultimately go to Plaintiff.
Therefore, Plaintiff’s Motions (ECF Nos. 317, 318) are GRANTED. The Clerk is
directed to ISSUE the proposed Writ of Execution (ECF No. 317-1), and the Court hereby
Case No. 1:18-cv-01060-RM-NRN Document 325 filed 11/01/22 USDC Colorado
pg 2 of 3

3
imposes a JUDGMENT LIEN on the proceeds, if any, from Defendant’s state court chose in
action.
DATED this 1st day of November, 2022.
BY THE COURT:
____________________________________
RAYMOND P. MOORE
United States District Judge
Case No. 1:18-cv-01060-RM-NRN Document 325 filed 11/01/22 USDC Colorado
pg 3 of 3