网上银行时代的银行账户装饰

原告在诉讼中获得判决, the plaintiff still must collect the amount owed by the defendant.  根据弗吉尼亚法律, there are several options available to a party attempting to collect a debt when the defendant does not pay willingly.  One of the most common tools is a garnishment – a legal proceeding filed by the plaintiff to obtain assets of the defendant that are being held by a third party to satisfy the debt – often wages held by an employer or money held by a bank. 

But what happens when the defendant deposits money in an online bank with no physical branches in Virginia?  随着网上银行越来越受欢迎, garnishing bank accounts with out of state banks has become a major issue for those attempting to collect on their judgments.  Defendants can easily go online and create new accounts with banks located nationwide.  Once the accounts are opened, defendants can move their money between banks at the touch of a button.  Locating bank accounts and being able to garnish the accounts before the funds are moved has become harder than ever.      

一旦原告找到资金, the plaintiff still faces two significant obstacles to instituting a garnishment proceeding in Virginia: (1) does the Virginia court have personal jurisdiction over the bank, and, if so, (2) can the bank account be garnished under Virginia law?  Personal jurisdiction is an issue involved in all cases – it is not unique to garnishments.  属人管辖权是一个复杂的问题, but any seasoned attorney should be able to navigate that problem.  因此，本文将不集中讨论这个问题. 

The focus of this article has to do with the limits of the statutory garnishment process in Virginia.  Garnishments are creatures of statute, set forth in Va. 法典§§8.01-511 et seq.  提起罚款诉讼, a party files a document entitled “Suggestion for Summons in Garnishment,” requesting that the Clerk issue a “Garnishment Summons."当书记发出扣押传票时, the plaintiff is responsible for having it served on the third party that is holding the garnished property, 还有被告.  Once the plaintiff has served the Garnishment Summons on the third party, it creates a lien over the defendant’s property being held by that third party.  留置权对于收取财产是必不可少的, because a plaintiff prevailing on a garnishment effectively enforces the lien and the court compels the third party to surrender the property to the plaintiff to help satisfy the judgment. 

不过，留置权是有限的.  Va. Code § 8.01-481规定了留置权的地域限制, and the boundary depends upon whether the property being garnished is tangible or intangible.  At first glance, one might assume that a deposit with a bank is tangible property, i.e. cash.  However, the Virginia Supreme Court has held that a general deposit with a bank is an intangible asset.  参见PS总线., L.P. v. Deutsch & Gilden公司., 287 Va. 410, 417, 758 S.E.2d 508, 511 (2014).  在本质上, 一旦有人在银行存了钱, 这笔钱成为银行的财产, 但银行欠存款人一笔相关债务.  Id.  The depositor no longer owns the money, it owns a debt owed by the bank.    

Because money deposited in a bank becomes an intangible asset, Va. Code § 8.01-481 dictates that the lien extends throughout the limits of the Commonwealth.  换句话说, if the intangible asset can be found anywhere within Virginia, 该资产为留置权，可以扣押.  However, 如果无形资产不在弗吉尼亚州, 该财产不受留置权的约束, 装饰就会失败. 

So where is the location of a deposit made in an online bank?  The Virginia Supreme Court has not yet addressed the issue.  However, at least one Virginia Circuit Court has held that a deposit with a bank that only has a physical presence outside of Virginia is nevertheless located in Virginia, the domicile of the depositors who are owed the debt from the bank.  盈透证券有限责任公司诉. CFG社区公司 et al. 民事诉讼编号. cl21 - 2089 (Cir. Ct. 2021年7月16日)(弗吉尼亚海滩).  这一立场得到了支持, since the general rule in Virginia is that the location of an intangible asset is the domicile of the owner.  See e.g. Grasty v. Clare, 210 Va. 21, 28, 168 S.E.2d 261, 266 (1969), 多米尼加国家银行诉. Jones, 202 Va. 502, 118 S.E.2d 672 (1961). 

However, courts in other states have reached the opposite conclusion.  See e.g. 电力租赁有限公司. V.I. Water & 权力身份验证., No. 3:20-cv-1015-J-32JRK, 2021 U.S. Dist. Lexis 15192 (m.D. Fla. Jan. 27, 2021). 

Until there is clarity from the legislature or the Virginia Supreme Court, Virginia trial courts will continue to grapple with this issue.  Given the prevalence of online banking, that guidance likely will come sooner rather than later.  在此期间, the issue is quite complex and parties attempting to garnish online bank accounts would be wise to consult an attorney with experience with the issue.

丹尼尔·伯杰 是一个Pender & Coward attorney focusing his practice on complex civil litigation, representing businesses and individuals in commercial disputes including contract law, 不正当竞争和商业秘密, 职业责任, 商业侵权.