Opinion ID: 694321
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Federal Debt Collection Act

Text: 18 The government argues that the 1982 consent judgment was a new, independent order of the court and is governed by the Federal Debt Collection Act, which was effective May 29, 1991 and was enacted to provide a uniform framework for enforcement of debts owed to the federal government. The statute of limitations for collecting on a lien created by a judgment in a civil action under this new Act is 20 years. 28 U.S.C. Sec. 3201(c) (1992). 19 The Act does not apply to any judgment entered more than ten years before the statute's effective date, thus the Act does not apply to the 1978 judgment. Id. at Sec. 3005. The 1982 judgment satisfies the ten year requirement, but it must be a judgment to which the Act was designed to apply, namely, judgments on a debt. Id. at Sec. 3001(a)(1). 20 The 1982 consent judgment was not a new judgment on a debt. There was no new adjudication of liability. The 1982 judgment cannot exist independently of the 1978 judgment. The consent judgment simply determined additional property to which the previous judgments could attach. 21 The 1982 consent judgment did not incorporate the earlier judgments. Instead, the judgments continued to be separately enforceable against Little's property after the consent judgment. The purpose of the consent judgment was not to create a lien upon property of the judgment debtor, but instead to provide that the liens arising from the prior judgments could be enforced against property not in Little's name and to provide for installment payments of the judgment. Therefore, the consent judgment was not a new and separate adjudication of liability, and the Federal Debt Collection Act does not apply.