Collecting a federal judgment: Rule 69 sends you to state law, and opens discovery against the debtor

Rule 69 is one of the shortest rules in the federal set and one of the most consequential, because of what it does not contain. There is no federal levy procedure, no federal exemption schedule, no federal garnishment mechanism.

Instead the rule borrows the enforcement law of the state where the court is located. Collecting a federal judgment in California is a California exercise; the same judgment collected in Washington runs on Washington law.

The borrowing rule

Rule 69(a)(1):

A money judgment is enforced by a writ of execution, unless the court directs otherwise. The procedure on execution — and in proceedings supplementary to and in aid of judgment or execution — must accord with the procedure of the state where the court is located, but a federal statute governs to the extent it applies.

Three layers, in order of priority:

1. A federal statute, where one applies;
2. otherwise, the procedure of the state where the court sits;
3. and the default instrument is the writ of execution, unless the court directs otherwise.

"Proceedings supplementary to and in aid of judgment or execution" is the phrase that matters most. It sweeps in the whole state apparatus — debtor examinations, liens, garnishment, turnover orders, charging orders — not merely the levy itself.

So the practical question after winning a federal money judgment is: what does this state's enforcement law provide? The state guides on this site answer it jurisdiction by jurisdiction. In California, for instance, the sequence is an abstract of judgment creating a lien under CCP 697.310, a writ of execution under CCP 699.510 issued one per county with a 180-day wait before a repeat, and a judgment debtor examination under CCP 708.110 that itself creates a one-year lien on personal property.

Discovery in aid of execution

Rule 69(a)(2):

In aid of the judgment or execution, the judgment creditor or a successor in interest whose interest appears of record may obtain discovery from any person — including the judgment debtor — as provided in these rules or by the procedure of the state where the court is located.

This is the provision that makes federal judgment enforcement workable, and it is broader than people expect.

"From any person." Not just the debtor — banks, employers, business partners, family members holding assets.

Either toolkit. The creditor may use the Federal Rules — interrogatories, document requests, depositions, subpoenas under Rule 45 — or the state's own post-judgment discovery procedure, whichever suits.

A successor in interest whose interest appears of record has the same rights, which matters where a judgment has been assigned.

In practice this means you can serve Rule 34 requests and take a Rule 30 deposition of the judgment debtor about their assets, or use the state's debtor examination, or both.

Public officers — Rule 69(b): where judgment is entered against a revenue officer in the circumstances of 28 U.S.C. § 2006, or against an officer of Congress under 2 U.S.C. § 118, "the judgment must be satisfied as those statutes provide." The ordinary machinery does not apply.

Before judgment: Rule 64

Rule 64 does for pre-judgment seizure what Rule 69 does for enforcement — it borrows state law.

Rule 64(a):

At the commencement of and throughout an action, every remedy is available that, under the law of the state where the court is located, provides for seizing a person or property to secure satisfaction of the potential judgment. But a federal statute governs to the extent it applies.

Rule 64(b) — the remedies included, "however designated and regardless of whether state procedure requires an independent action":

arrest · attachment · garnishment · replevin · sequestration · and other corresponding or equivalent remedies.

Two features worth noting.

"At the commencement of and throughout an action." These are available from the outset, not only once judgment is in sight.

"Regardless of whether state procedure requires an independent action." A state remedy that would ordinarily need its own separate proceeding is available within the federal action.

So a plaintiff in a federal case in California can seek a right to attach order under CCP 484.010 — with its $500 contract-claim threshold, its noticed hearing on 16 court days, and its undertaking requirement — inside the federal action. The guide on the California writ of attachment covers what that entails.

Depositing money with the court

Rule 67(a):

If any part of the relief sought is a money judgment or the disposition of a sum of money or some other deliverable thing, a party — on notice to every other party and by leave of court — may deposit with the court all or part of the money or thing, whether or not that party claims any of it. The depositing party must deliver to the clerk a copy of the order permitting deposit.

Three requirements: notice to every party, leave of court, and delivery of the order to the clerk.

The clause "whether or not that party claims any of it" is what makes Rule 67 useful to a stakeholder — a party holding disputed funds can put them in court without conceding or asserting any entitlement.

Rule 67(b) governs investing and withdrawing the funds, in accordance with the applicable statutes.

Rule 67 is not a stay and it is not security for a judgment. For that, Rule 62 governs — the guide on staying a federal judgment covers the automatic 30 days and the bond-or-other-security route.

The enforcement sequence

What this means practically

Research the forum state, not the federal rules. Rule 69 is a pointer. The substance — what property is exempt, how a levy is made, what a debtor examination looks like, how long a judgment lasts — is state law.

The state's exemptions apply. A federal judgment does not override the homestead or wage-garnishment caps of the state where the court sits. In California that means the homestead exemption under CCP 704.730 and the 20-percent-or-40-percent wage cap under CCP 706.050; the guides on California exemptions and wage garnishment cover both.

But federal statutes trump. Both Rule 64 and Rule 69 carry the same proviso, and where a federal statute supplies a collection mechanism it displaces the state one.

And discovery is the first move, not the last. Rule 69(a)(2) is available immediately and reaches non-parties. Most enforcement failures are failures to locate assets, not failures of process.

How this compares

A short checklist

1. Identify the state where the court sits. That state's law governs the whole enforcement process.
2. Check for an applicable federal statute first — it displaces state procedure to the extent it applies.
3. Wait out or account for the Rule 62(a) automatic 30 days, and watch for a Rule 62(b) security.
4. Start with discovery under Rule 69(a)(2). It is available against any person, and you may use the federal rules or the state procedure.
5. Follow the forum state's lien steps early. In many states a recorded lien runs from the date of judgment, so delay costs lien life rather than merely time.
6. Expect the forum state's exemptions, and plan around them rather than litigating them late.
7. If you need pre-judgment security, use Rule 64 — state remedies are available from the commencement of the action, even where state law would require a separate proceeding.
8. If you are holding disputed funds, consider Rule 67 — notice to every party and leave of court, and you need not claim any of the money.

Where these rules live

• FRCP 54 — Judgment; costs
• FRCP 58 — Entering judgment
• FRCP 62 — Stay of proceedings to enforce a judgment
• FRCP 64 — Seizing a person or property
• FRCP 67 — Deposit into court
• FRCP 69 — Execution
• FRCP 70 — Enforcing a judgment for a specific act
• FRCP 45 — Subpoena

The state enforcement statutes Rule 69 incorporates are covered on this site jurisdiction by jurisdiction. The federal statutes the rule cross-references — 28 U.S.C. § 2006 and 2 U.S.C. § 118 — are not reproduced here. This page explains what the rules say. It isn't legal advice.