Legal Question in Credit and Debt Law in Virginia
Judgment recovery and using a contigency method
I have read an Amendment to the Rules of Court: Unauthorized Practice of Law Opinion 203. My wife and I have spent a considerable amount of time and money in starting a judgment recovery business based upon the ''contigency'' method outlined in our course manual that we received (given that it is not state specific). This opinion states that we are unable to use the ''contigency'' method of enforcing judgments although with an Acknowledgment of Assignment of Judgment, in the eyes of the law (or so we believed), we would become the new judgment creditors attempting to enforce a judgment against a debtor. If there is another agreement signed between both the previous judgment creditor and us stating a percentage that the previous judgment creditor would receive (even in an agreement stating irregular payments for such said judgment) a percentage agreed upon at the same time the Acknowledgment of Assignment of Judgment is signed, how are we acting on his/her behalf or attempting to represent them if we are the NEW judgment creditors? Is it a matter of wording or something? Is there anyway that we may still use the contigency method while enforcing a judgment? Any information on this matter will be gladly appreciated.
1 Answer from Attorneys
Re: Judgment recovery and using a contigency method
If you owe the prior "owner" a share of the recovery, you are acting on their behalf and thus engaged in the unauthorized practice of law. In the eyes of the law, you are not truly the "new" judgment creditor under such circumstances. The "course manual" to which you refer is a scam.
Related Questions & Answers
Looking for something else?
10,200 active attorneys ready to answer your legal questions today.
Featured Attorneys
Earn additional revenue and grow your business.
