When a Judgment Is Not Enough: How Florida Law Lets Creditors Reach Hidden Assets

Winning a lawsuit and obtaining a judgment is supposed to mean something. But many business owners and individuals quickly learn a hard truth: a judgment does not automatically result in payment. Even after years of litigation, creditors often find themselves holding a piece of paper that cannot be enforced because the debtor claims to have no assets, no income, and nothing to levy.

This is not accidental. In many cases, judgment debtors intentionally move money, property, or business interests into the hands of related companies, family members, or insiders to make collection as difficult as possible. Florida law recognizes this reality. That is why it provides a powerful but often misunderstood tool called proceedings supplementary.

Florida judgment creditors may soon receive important clarity on how strong that tool really is. In October 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit asked the Florida Supreme Court to resolve a major conflict in Florida law concerning fraudulent transfers and proceedings supplementary under section 56.29, Florida Statutes.

Background: what proceedings supplementary are meant to do

Proceedings supplementary exist to address the exact situation where a creditor has a valid, unsatisfied judgment but cannot execute on it through normal means. Section 56.29 allows courts to look beyond what the debtor claims to own and examine whether assets were transferred, concealed, or placed in other hands to avoid payment.

The statute is designed to give courts broad, equitable authority to reach assets that should be available to satisfy a judgment, even if they are no longer titled in the debtor’s name. Historically, Florida courts treated proceedings supplementary as a continuation of the original case, focused on enforcing the judgment rather than starting a brand-new lawsuit.

The problem: conflicting court decisions

That understanding has been shaken by conflicting appellate decisions. One line of cases has narrowly limited what judgment creditors can recover, while another has reaffirmed the traditional, creditor-protective role of proceedings supplementary.

In McGregor v. Fowler White Burnett, P.A., 332 So. 3d 481 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021), a Florida appellate court interpreted section 56.29 in a restrictive way. Under that approach, creditors may be barred from seeking money judgments against transferees, limited to very narrow categories of personal property, and subject to short limitation periods borrowed from Florida’s fraudulent transfer statute. In practical terms, this interpretation can reward debtors who successfully hide assets for a few years.

By contrast, another Florida appellate court rejected that narrow reading and reaffirmed that proceedings supplementary are meant to prevent judgment debtors from benefitting from fraudulent transfers, regardless of how those transfers are structured or how long enforcement takes within the life of the judgment. See Rosenberg v. U.S. Bank, N.A., 360 So. 3d 795 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023).

The Eleventh Circuit steps in

Faced with these conflicting interpretations, the Eleventh Circuit certified several questions to the Florida Supreme Court in Saadi v. Maroun, 157 F.4th 1353 (11th Cir. 2025). The court is asking Florida’s highest court to clarify, among other things:

• Whether a judgment creditor can obtain a money judgment directly against a transferee;

• Whether fraudulently transferred funds must remain identifiable to be recoverable;

• Whether assets acquired with transferred funds, including real property, can be reached;

• Whether recent statutory changes shortened the time to pursue proceedings supplementary;

• Whether concealment and obstruction can toll time limits.

These questions go to the heart of whether proceedings supplementary remain an effective enforcement tool or become a procedural dead end for creditors.

Why this matters to clients

For clients, this is not an academic debate. The outcome will directly affect whether judgments can be enforced against debtors who shift assets into LLCs, trusts, or family members’ names. If narrow interpretations prevail, judgment debtors may be able to run out the clock simply by hiding assets long enough. If broader, traditional interpretations are confirmed, Florida courts will retain the ability to unwind fraudulent schemes and enforce judgments as intended.

This decision will impact business disputes, real estate cases, partnership breakups, and any situation where a debtor refuses to pay despite a court judgment.

Looking ahead

The Florida Supreme Court’s eventual ruling is expected to reshape post-judgment enforcement practice statewide. Until then, judgment creditors should act carefully and strategically to preserve their rights and avoid procedural traps.

At VAdam Law, we regularly assist clients who hold judgments but cannot collect because assets have been moved, concealed, or placed in related entities. Proceedings supplementary can be powerful, but they must be handled correctly.

If you have a judgment that remains unpaid, or if you suspect assets were transferred to avoid collection, experienced guidance can make the difference between a paper judgment and real recovery.  VAdam Law is available to assist. Consultations may be scheduled through our online scheduling portal or by calling (954) 451-0792.