The number is well known in commercial collection practice. Roughly three out of four money judgments entered in New York courts never get paid. Some of those debtors are genuinely insolvent and nothing was ever going to be recovered. The rest, and there are more in this category than most creditors realize, simply outlasted creditors who didn’t know how to chase them. The team at Warner & Scheuerman spends most of its post-judgment practice on the second category, the judgments that look uncollectible until somebody actually goes looking for the assets, and the difference between the two outcomes is rarely about luck.
The 75 percent figure isn’t a marketing line. It reflects the reality that obtaining a judgment and collecting on a judgment are two completely different practices, and most law firms in New York are equipped for the first but not the second.
Where the 75% Number Comes From
Industry sources from the American Bar Association, ACA International, and academic studies of consumer and commercial debt all converge on similar figures. Estimates range from roughly 60 to 80 percent of money judgments going unsatisfied within the standard enforcement window, depending on the type of debt and the jurisdiction. The common denominator is that obtaining a judgment is the easier half of the work.
In New York specifically, the structural factors that drive the number include the procedural complexity of CPLR Article 52, the twenty-year enforcement clock under CPLR 211(b), the ten-year real property lien under CPLR 5203(a), and the general willingness of debtors to wait creditors out.
The Six Reasons Most Judgments Become Worthless
A handful of patterns explain why so many judgments collect dust rather than dollars.
The original litigation attorney often considers the work finished at judgment entry. The case has been won, the client has been billed, and the file is ready to close. Post-judgment enforcement is treated as a separate engagement that the client may or may not pursue.
Asset investigation is its own discipline. Locating bank accounts, brokerage accounts, real property, business interests, accounts receivable, vehicles, and other assets that can satisfy a judgment requires technique that most general litigators don’t develop. A simple skip trace on the debtor’s address rarely produces enough to move on.
Debtors who anticipate adverse judgments are often well ahead of the creditor. Assets get titled in spouses’ names, transferred to LLCs, moved offshore, or layered under nominee ownership before the original suit was even filed. Without aggressive investigation, a creditor sees only the surface.
Default judgments compound the problem. Many money judgments in New York are obtained on default against shell companies, dissolved entities, or absent individuals who are difficult to find later. The creditor has a piece of paper, but the entity it names is functionally unreachable.
Statutory deadlines surprise creditors who don’t track them. The ten-year real property lien under CPLR 5203(a) expires while the judgment is still otherwise alive. The twenty-year presumption of payment under CPLR 211(b) closes the file conclusively. By the time the debtor is finally findable, the rights to enforce have lapsed.
Most importantly, creditors give up. Two or three failed enforcement attempts and the file goes into a drawer. Debtors know this. Wait long enough and most creditors stop pushing.
What Sophisticated Creditors Do Differently
The judgment creditors who collect, including the in-house counsel of large institutions and the law firms that specialize in this work, share a few practices that the others skip.
Asset investigation begins early, sometimes before the underlying lawsuit is filed. Knowing what the debtor actually owns shapes the litigation strategy and the post-judgment plan from day one. By the time judgment is entered, the creditor already has a target list rather than a search problem.
Investigation goes well beyond bank accounts. Brokerage accounts, cash value life insurance policies, cryptocurrency holdings, beneficial interests in trusts, accounts receivable owed to the debtor, royalty streams, intellectual property, charging-order targets in LLCs and partnerships, real property held under nominee names, and inheritance expectancies are all on the table. Many of these are public-records-discoverable with the right search.
Persistence is part of the methodology. Sophisticated creditors return to the well annually or more often, restraining accounts, deposing debtors, and renewing executions. They treat enforcement as a sustained campaign rather than a single event.
Fraudulent conveyance claims under New York’s Uniform Voidable Transactions Act, which replaced the older UFCA effective April 4, 2020 and is now codified at Debtor and Creditor Law sections 270 through 281, become part of the toolkit when assets have been transferred to family members, business associates, or related entities at less than fair value or with intent to hinder creditors.
When the corporate debtor is genuinely empty, alter ego and veil-piercing analysis identifies whether the individuals behind it can be reached personally. New York case law on commingling, undercapitalization, and dominion-and-control is well-developed and the right factual record opens up assets the original judgment never reached.
The Article 52 Tools That Most Attorneys Never File
CPLR Article 52 contains the formal mechanisms for post-judgment enforcement, and the toolkit is broader than most general litigators ever use:
- Information subpoenas under CPLR 5224, served on the debtor or on third parties holding information about the debtor, with statutory penalties for non-compliance
- Restraining notices under CPLR 5222, which freeze bank and brokerage accounts in the hands of the institution before the debtor can move funds
- Property executions and levies under CPLR 5230 and 5232
- Income executions for wage garnishment under CPLR 5231
- Turnover proceedings under CPLR 5225 to compel third parties to deliver debtor property in their possession
- Examinations of the judgment debtor under oath, conducted as depositions
- Receiverships under CPLR 5228 for ongoing assets and income streams
- Charging orders against LLC and partnership interests
- Sister-state and foreign judgment domestication under CPLR Article 54 and Article 53
A creditor who has done one information subpoena and one restraining notice has barely opened the toolbox. The 25 percent of judgments that get collected typically involve sustained, layered use of multiple tools over time.
How Warner & Scheuerman Handles Judgments Other Firms Have Given Up On
The firm’s collection practice runs on a particular operating model. An in-house investigative team works alongside the attorneys and uses public and proprietary records, court filings, deed and UCC searches, business filings, financial records subpoenaed from third parties, and other sources to map a debtor’s actual asset picture rather than the debtor’s stated one.
A representative pattern from past matters: a judgment debtor swore in a deposition that he held no significant assets. Investigation traced more than half a million dollars in a brokerage account titled in joint name with another person. Turnover proceedings, follow-up depositions, and motion practice established that the account beneficially belonged to the debtor rather than the nominal joint owner, and the recovery followed.
That kind of result requires a willingness to spend the time before the recovery is certain. Most firms aren’t structured to do that work, which is why most judgments don’t recover.
When Investigation Pays for Itself
Not every judgment justifies the cost of full enforcement. The decision to invest in deep investigation turns on the size of the judgment, the age of the judgment relative to the twenty-year clock, the realistic universe of recoverable assets, and the litigation history of the debtor. Counsel that has worked these matters can usually distinguish a recoverable case from an unrecoverable one within a few hours of file review.
If you’re holding a New York money judgment that has been sitting unpaid, or you represent a client whose collection efforts have stalled at the first or second attempt, the answer is rarely that the judgment is dead. Reach out to Warner & Scheuerman to evaluate what assets remain reachable, what enforcement steps have not yet been taken, and whether your judgment belongs in the 25 percent that actually recover.
