Obtaining a judgment in a Michigan court establishes the creditor’s right to payment, yet it seldom produces an immediate monetary result. The legal system entrusts enforcement to the prevailing party, and success depends on measured, procedural action rather than the persuasive merits that carried the underlying lawsuit. Understanding the structures that frame post‑judgment practice—deadlines, discovery devices, enforcement writs, statutory exemptions, costs, and emerging legislative trends—allows businesses and their counsel to convert a judgment from an abstract entitlement into a realizable asset.
Please note this blog post should be used for learning and illustrative purposes. It is not a substitute for consultation with an attorney with expertise in this area. If you have questions about a specific legal issue, we always recommend that you consult an attorney to discuss the particulars of your case.
Roles in Judgment Collection
When the clerk enters a money judgment, the parties’ litigation identities change. The prevailing party becomes the judgment creditor, and the opposing party becomes the judgment debtor. This change is more than semantic; it reallocates burdens. The court will not pursue payment, and the debtor has no affirmative duty to volunteer assets. Consequently, the creditor must marshal information, select enforcement mechanisms, and remain vigilant for debtor conduct—such as asset transfers, fraud‑bulking, or bankruptcy filings—that could impair recovery. Every subsequent measure, from informal negotiation to compulsory process, flows from this basic allocation of responsibility.
Initial Steps After Judgment
Michigan law imposes a twenty‑one‑day hiatus between entry of the judgment and commencement of most enforcement actions. The interval is designed to provide the debtor an opportunity to satisfy the obligation voluntarily or to negotiate structured payments. Creditors who anticipate resistance should use the pause to gather preliminary intelligence: employment details, banking relationships, property holdings, and the prospect of a consensual repayment schedule. If the debtor cooperates, a court‑ordered installment plan can eliminate the need for more intrusive remedies and, in some cases, temporarily limit the creditor’s right to garnishment.
Judgments are not perpetual. Small‑claims awards lapse after six years, and other Michigan judgments expire after ten. Time spent while the debtor makes installment payments tolled the clock, yet creditors who ignore expiration dates forfeit enforcement. Renewal requires a timely ex parte motion filed in the issuing court. Prudent creditors diarize renewal thresholds well in advance, ensuring seamless continuation of collection rights.
Discovery Subpoena: Identifying Assets
Effective enforcement begins with reliable knowledge of the debtor’s asset portfolio. Michigan’s discovery subpoena—sometimes styled a creditor’s or debtor’s examination—supplements public records searches and informal investigation. Twenty‑one days after judgment, the creditor may file Form MC 11, setting a hearing at which the debtor must appear under oath to answer questions about earnings, bank accounts, securities, real estate, and personal property. Service must be executed by a disinterested adult or professional process server at least fourteen days before the examination, and the subpoena must state the precise time and location endorsed by the court.
At the examination, counsel can probe the debtor’s financial affairs in depth, compel production of documents, and fix evasive testimony for future contempt proceedings. Accurate asset mapping allows the creditor to match enforcement tools to available resources, minimizing wasted writs and maximizing pressure on non‑compliant debtors.
Garnishment Procedures
Garnishment intercepts money owed to or held for the debtor by a third party and directs it to the creditor. Michigan procedure distinguishes periodic garnishments, non‑periodic garnishments, and income‑tax garnishments, but all share an identical predicate: the creditor must wait the statutory twenty‑one days, complete the appropriate garnishment request form, and obtain the court’s signed writ. Once issued, the writ, accompanied by a blank disclosure form, is served on the garnishee and mailed or delivered to the debtor.
Periodic garnishment is the principal method for reaching wages and other predictable streams, such as land‑contract or lease payments. It obliges employers and other payors to withhold a portion of each payment for up to ninety‑one days or until the judgment is satisfied. Federal and state ceilings limit the amount withheld to the lesser of twenty‑five percent of disposable income or the excess over thirty hours of federal minimum wage, preserving the debtor’s subsistence income.
Non‑periodic garnishment targets discrete assets, most commonly bank balances. Upon service, the financial institution must freeze funds up to the amount of the writ, file a disclosure within fourteen days, and remit the money to the court after the objection period lapses. A new writ is required for each additional levy, making accurate timing essential when debtors maintain low balances.
Michigan also authorizes garnishment of state tax refunds. The creditor must possess the debtor’s Social Security number, file the income‑tax writ between the first of November and the end of December, and await the Department of Treasury’s annual distribution cycle. Though slower than wage or bank garnishments, tax refund interception can yield meaningful recoveries where the debtor is otherwise judgment‑proof.
Writ of Execution: Property Seizure
When liquid assets are insufficient, creditors may seek a writ of execution, formally called an Order to Seize Property. By filing Form MC 19 and paying the statutory fee, the creditor empowers a sheriff or court officer to locate, seize, and sell non‑exempt personal or real property. The officer must first attempt to satisfy the judgment from personal property—vehicles, equipment, inventory, cash—before turning to real estate. Seizure generates an inventory filed with the court, and auction proceeds, net of fees, are disbursed to the creditor. The writ carries a return date no less than twenty and no more than ninety days after issuance, compelling diligent execution.
In parallel, a creditor may perfect a judgment lien against real property by recording Form MC 94 with the county registrar. The lien encumbers the debtor’s title, impeding sale or refinancing until the judgment is paid. Although Michigan does not permit foreclosure solely on a judgment lien, the encumbrance often secures voluntary payment when the debtor seeks to transact with the property.
Property Exemptions
Michigan’s exemption statutes balance creditor rights against debtor subsistence and social policy. Debtors retain essential wearing apparel, family photographs, and six months of provisions and fuel; household goods and furnishings up to a prescribed aggregate value; professional tools and a modest vehicle necessary for work; qualified retirement plans and annuities; insurance proceeds for disability or sickness; and specified public benefits. A homestead exemption shields a defined equity interest in a principal residence, whether an acreage tract or a platted lot.
Execution officers must allow debtors ten days to select property within these categories, and creditors who disregard exemptions risk turnover orders, sanctions, and additional costs. Proposed legislation would raise exemption thresholds, introduce protection for personal motor vehicles of moderate value, and extend coverage to service animals, reflecting contemporary economic realities and social values.
Collection Costs
Every enforcement measure entails expense. Filing a garnishment, discovery subpoena, or writ of execution generally costs fifteen dollars, and service requires payment to a process server, sheriff, or court officer, whose mileage and handling charges vary by county. Garnishees may collect statutory disclosure fees—thirty‑five dollars for wage garnishments, modest amounts for others—and officers executing writs earn commissions and expense allowances calculated as a percentage of recovered proceeds.
Michigan Court Rule 2.625 and MCL 600.2405 permit successful creditors to tax post‑judgment costs and add them to the balance owed. Debtors may demand an accounting and contest non‑allowable charges, so creditors benefit from meticulous record‑keeping and conservative cost management.
Recent Legal Developments
The statutory framework for judgment enforcement is not static. Senate Bill 408, pending before the Legislature, would recalibrate exemption values biennially according to the Consumer Price Index, expand the homestead exemption, and require early, written notice to debtors before execution. Separately, recent amendments to Michigan Court Rule 2.421 oblige parties to notify state courts of bankruptcy filings, triggering automatic stays that arrest collection activity until relief from stay is obtained. Reports from the Michigan Justice for All Commission and empirical studies documenting the prevalence of debt‑collection cases in district courts signal continuing scrutiny that could yield further procedural reforms.
Practitioners who monitor these developments can adjust strategies proactively—postponing a writ pending a favorable statutory change, accelerating action before exemptions rise, or coordinating with bankruptcy counsel when a debtor files a petition.
Strategic Recommendations
Success in Michigan judgment collection derives from disciplined timing, informed selection of remedies, and precise compliance with procedural detail. Creditors should launch asset discovery immediately, docket renewal deadlines years in advance, and deploy garnishment or execution promptly once asset locations are confirmed. Where information is sparse, the discovery subpoena supplies leverage; where liquidity exists, garnishment offers speed; and where the debtor owns illiquid property, a judgment lien or writ of execution secures longer‑term leverage.
Because post‑judgment practice intersects with federal garnishment limits, exemption statutes, bankruptcy law, and rapidly evolving state legislation, collaboration with experienced collection counsel remains the prudent course. Counsel can craft an integrated plan, coordinate with investigators and court officers, and pivot tactics as debtor circumstances or legal standards change, thereby maximizing the likelihood that the judgment transforms from paper to payment.
Contact Tishkoff
Tishkoff PLC specializes in business law and litigation. For inquiries, contact us at www.tish.law/contact/. & check out Tishkoff PLC’s Website (www.Tish.Law/), eBooks (www.Tish.Law/e-books), Blogs (www.Tish.Law/blog) and References (www.Tish.Law/resources).
Further Reading
- How To Collect On A Judgment | Jackson County, MI, https://www.mijackson.org/761/How-To-Collect-On-A-Judgment
- Collecting Your Money From a Small Claims Judgment – Michigan Courts, https://www.courts.michigan.gov/siteassets/forms/scao-approved/dci84.pdf
- Collecting a Judgment – Livingston County, MI, https://milivcounty.gov/district/collecting/
- Post Judgment Collections | Dearborn Heights, MI, https://dearbornheightsmi.gov/253/Post-Judgment-Collections
- MCL – Section 600.5809 – Michigan Legislature, https://www.legislature.mi.gov/Laws/MCL?objectName=MCL-600-5809
- A Judgment Lien Statute – State Bar of Michigan, https://www.michbar.org/file/barjournal/article/documents/pdf4article691.pdf
- How to Use a Michigan Judgment Lien in Your Collection Efforts – Kreis Enderle, https://www.kreisenderle.com/how-to-use-a-michigan-judgment-lien-in-your-collection-efforts/