No
FIRST QUESTION: If the civil court judgment is in the state of California, and the webserver is in another state, and the bank which handles the VISA [or Mastercard] payments is in yet another state, then how does a California state court have authority to intercept payments which have nothing to do with the state of California?
Do all states have some sort of “reciprocity” agreement with one another when it comes to civil court claims? [Or do you have to contract with a multistate law firm which has a physical presence in all the different states?]
We know that the winery is hiding its money from the court, so its new bank accounts [unbeknownst to the court] could very well be in the Cayman Islands.
Ergo, for a customer on a mailing list, the flow of 0s & 1s which constitute a payment might very well look like:
Mailing list customer on his computer in New York ->
Webserver in Illinois ->
Processing bank in Delaware ->
Account in Cayman Islands
How can a local judge in California possibly hope to intercept transactions like that [without aid from the Feds]?
PS: It gets really nasty if you’re dealing with “Virtual Servers”: The hardware server might be owned by LLC #1, which rents it to LLC #2, which then rents a “Virtual Server” to LLC #3, which then rents a “Virtual Virtual Server” to LLC #4, etc etc etc, and the court might need to issue a staggering number of writs/subpoenas to peal away all the different layers of the onion and figure out what’s going on.
SECOND QUESTION: Let’s assume for the sake of discussion that the winery is still active, and still making wine, and still has its production lines up & running.
And let’s suppose that the winery’s production lines produce [filled] bottles of wine, which are then placed in cardboard [or wooden] cases, which are then placed on pallets.
And let’s assume that those pallets filled with cases of wine are actually sitting on the physical premises of the winery.
Then why don’t the Sheriff & his deputies drive over to the winery with a flatbed truck & a forklift, and simply seize whatever they can find in order to pay off the judgment against the winery? [Are California sheriffs so overwhelmed with violent crime that they have neither the time nor the budgets to get creative like that?]
Could it be that somehow the distributor’s rights supercede the grower’s rights, and a [paid] contract to sell the wine to a distributor somehow trumps the [unpaid] bill to a grower?
Or is there some quirk in the California legal tradition which forbids a Sheriff from seizing alcohol for civil court judgments?
PS: Couldn’t the plaintiff make an offer to be paid in “shiners” [unlabeled bottles upon which the plaintiff could slap his own label]?
Or is the plaintiff solely interested in cold hard cash?
We are no longer in the wine business. we surrendered our TTB and ABC licenses so we can’t sell the wine. Thus, we are not interested in being “paid” in wine.
I have nothing of interest to say on the subject matter of this thread, but I did want to thank Nathan for the chuckle I got when reading that California is lawless. If there is one thing California has in surfeit, it is laws.
Oh.
Okay.
I hadn’t heard about that.
Still, though, couldn’t the sheriff seize some wine & send it [in-state] to a reseller like K&L or Brentwood, and maybe you could realize 30 or 40 cents on the dollar?
That would be a felony and the sheriff and entire staff of the store would be imprisoned.
Have you considered investing in a law degree?
Word is, Kim Kardashian is looking to join a study group as she “reads” law.
I don’t know how much Winery X owes, but sometimes Small Claims court is wonderful. If they owe so much that Small Claims Court doesn’t come close, I
d get a lawyer and get to work. If they owe an amount where you could cut your losses a bit, try this approach.
It is interesting to me that if a store or restaurant loses in small claims court you can have a sheriff stationed by the cash register and he will do your dirty work.
Why can’t the sheriff attach credit card payments?? Or at the least couldn’t you collect from their bank account??
You CAN garnish their bank account (no matter where the bank’s server is). But you do have to get a judgment first, which means suing them.
The debt exceeds the Small Claims Court limit.
In any event, we have a judgment. The problem is collecting.
The Sheriff levies on the winery’s and owner’s checking accounts once a month but that is hit and miss. The cash is coming in thru credit card sales at the tasting room and the website. These are handled by Merchant Services and AM EX. I contacted Merchant Services and they are looking at the matter.
I dunno - $92,450 per year at HLS doesn’t seem to come with any sort of guarantee that the student can actually read worth a damn.
That’s why she’s so heroic. I mean, she was doing that with her baby due any day. Can you imagine the stress? Of course, she wasn’t carrying the fetus herself, that’s what you hire people to do. And on top of that dealing with Kanye on his journey of transformation. Sheesh!
As far as Stephen’s issue, only thing I can think of is -
I know a guy . . .
Stephen,
Sorry you have had to go through this. I am not a collection expert, but a “keeper” is an option. See C.C.P. 700.070
Stephen (Pepe) – Have you initiated a debtor’s examination? It’s a hearing where you can grill the deadbeat about his/its assets. It’s a good way to apply pressure – more intimidating than a deposition – and might provide information about other ways to collect.
If the winery has investors, can you go after them? Just a thought . . .
Generally not unless (a) they’re actively involved in management or (b) the corporate formalities haven’t been observed, in which case you could “pierce the corporate veil” (=ignore the limited liability that corporations allow to shareholders). But that’s complicated to prove and I doubt it would be worth the legal fees here.
What about just old fashioned “advertising”: picket outside the winery with a sign that says “XXX doesn’t pay for its grapes, don’t buy their wine”. Especially at harvest, when other growers might be delivering 
Yes we have done a debtor’s exam.
I am too old to picket.
Is there a limit on how many times you can do a debtor’s exam/post-judgment discovery in CA?