Supreme Court of Florida
Shaun OLMSTEAD, et al., Appellants,
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, Appellee.
June 24, 2010.
Rehearing Denied Aug. 31, 2010.
In this case we consider a question of law certified by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit concerning the rights of a judgment creditor, the appellee Federal Trade Commission (FTC), regarding the respective ownership interests of appellants Shaun Olmstead and Julie Connell in certain Florida single member limited liability companies (LLCs). Specifically, the Eleventh Circuit certified the following question: “Whether, pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 608.433(4), a court may order a judgment debtor to surrender all ‘right, title, and interest’ in the debtor’s *78 single member limited liability company to satisfy an outstanding judgment.” Fed. Trade Comm’n v. Olmstead, 528 F.3d 1310, 1314 (11th Cir.2008). We have discretionary jurisdiction under article V, section 3(b)(6), Florida Constitution.
The appellants contend that the certified question should be answered in the negative because the only remedy available against their ownership interests in the single member LLCs is a charging order, the sole remedy authorized by the statutory provision referred to in the certified question. The FTC argues that the certified question should be answered in the affirmative because the statutory charging order remedy is not the sole remedy available to the judgment creditor of the owner of a single member limited liability company.
For the reasons we explain, we conclude that the statutory charging order provision does not preclude application of the creditor’s remedy of execution on an interest in a single member LLC. In line with our analysis, we rephrase the certified question as follows: “Whether Florida law permits a court to order a judgment debtor to surrender all right, title, and interest in the debtor’s single member limited liability company to satisfy an outstanding judgment.” We answer the rephrased question in the affirmative.