Writ of Execution in Lucas v Notcommunist366 2026 SDCR 31
Writ of Execution in "Lucas v Notcommunist366 [2026] Civ 5"' [2026] SDCR 31
| Date of judgment | 22nd March 2026 |
| Judge | Judge Mypenjustbroke |
| Ruling | The petition for a Writ of Execution is granted. |
| Applicable precedent |
|
MAJORITY OPINION by Judge Mypenjustbroke
Introduction and Legal Authority
[1] This petition for Writ of Execution comes from Lucas v. Notcommunist366, [2026] Civ 5. In this petition, the Petitioner, Lucas, alleges—and the record supports—that Respondent Notcommunist366 has not complied with the Inferior Court’s judgment for Respondent to pay Petitioner’s attorney’s fees of one thousand tau (1,000t).
[2] Under Part 2, Article 2, §1.2, of the Judiciary Act 2025, “[a]pplications for the court to exercise continuing jurisdiction shall be heard by a single Judge of the Court of Review.” In understanding that the petition was filed requesting such, Judge Mypenjustbroke was assigned as the sole Judge to preside over the matter.
[3] The ability to issue a Writ of Execution is granted by The Schedule within the Judiciary Act 2025, wherein this Court holds “power to issue to any person or authority any direction, order or writ for the enforcement of any right conferred by any written law or for any other purpose[.]" Opinion and Writ of Execution [2025] SDCR 28, [14].
Procedural History
[3] In [2025] Civ 5, the Inferior Court rendered a default judgment against Respondent for inactivity. After Respondent’s appeal, we affirmed the default judgment. See Notcommunist366 (Appellant) v. Lucas (Respondent) [2026] SDCR 26. The judgment itself ordered that Respondent pay 1,000 tau to Petitioner for attorneys’ fees, pursuant to the Courtroom Procedures Act 2025 Article 27, § 2, et seq.
Findings of Fact
[4] The debtor in this matter is one Notcommunist366. She owes the amounts described in [1] and [3] to Petitioner and has not made any effort to cure that debt for reason of insolvency.
[5] The total enforceable outstanding amount totals 1,000.00 tau.
Analysis
[6] “It is necessary that judgments be enforced in a timely and equitable manner, else there is no mechanical reason to have them.” Opinion and Writ of Execution [2025] SDCR 28, [15]. Upon a showing of unwillingness to volitionally pay civil judgments rendered against them, judgment debtors must be made to—within the confines of the law—satisfy such judgment.
[7] Respondent has claimed that she is not able to pay the judgment for reason of insolvency or an inadequate amount of funds available to her. We do not find this to be an acceptable excuse. Respondent gets paid a wage for work. Respondent must have assets of some form or fashion. Additionally, future pay, where insolvency is claimed, is a reasonable future asset upon which to garnish.
Holding
[8] The petition for enforcement by writ of execution is granted.
WRIT OF EXECUTION by Judge Mypenjustbroke
IT IS HEREBY AUTHORIZED, ORDERED, AND COMMANDED, pursuant to the Court’s authority to enforce civil judgments, that the Department of the Treasury shall:
- Seize and liquidate the assets of Debtor Notcommunist366 up to the outstanding judgment total. Such assets may include Respondent’s future pay from the State by way of garnishment not more than 50% per pay period, bank accounts, ownership interest(s) in any company incorporated or legally participating within the jurisdiction of the State of SimDemocracy, or any other legal holdings with liquidable value, except the retainer accounts or payment(s) to attorneys that are not reasonably ascertained to be unjustifiable for the defensive or appellate needs of this or the underlying case.
- Disburse the proceeds of liquidation to Receiver Lucas according to the amount approved by this Court.
- Return any proceeds exceeding the judgment amount listed in [1] and [3] of this opinion to Respondent.
It is so ordered.