California Legal Brief

The Rule of Greely v. Greely is that a judgment creditor cannot use the spousal exception under Code of Civil Procedure section 700.160(b)(2) to levy on deposit accounts held in the name of a bigamous spouse without a court order, because a bigamous marriage is void ab initio and the supporting spousal affidavit is therefore false, under circumstances where the marriage was bigamous at inception regardless of whether it has been formally annulled.

Appeal from judgment after hearing on claims of exemption in Superior Court, San Diego County.

Defendant Appellant was Jenny Ying Lin Lu — the bigamous spouse whose separately-held bank accounts were levied upon based on a false spousal affidavit.

Plaintiff Respondent was Patricia L. Greely — the first wife and judgment creditor who obtained writs of execution against her ex-husband and levied on his bigamous spouse's accounts.

The suit sounded in enforcement of judgments. Patricia sought to enforce a $1.4 million family law judgment against Albert by levying on bank accounts held by Jenny based on their purported marriage.

The key substantive facts leading to the suit were Patricia divorced Albert in 2023 and obtained a $1.4 million judgment for spousal support arrears and equalization payment. Meanwhile, Albert bigamously married Jenny in 2020 while still married to Patricia. When Albert failed to pay, Patricia levied on Jenny's separate bank accounts using the spousal exception in Code of Civil Procedure section 700.160(b)(2), supported by an affidavit claiming Jenny was Albert's spouse. Over $380,000 was frozen from accounts held in Jenny's name alone or with her son. Jenny had the bigamous marriage annulled and challenged the levies.

The procedural result leading to the Appeal: The trial court denied Jenny's motion to quash the notices of levy, ruling that "The court does not find that the annulment of the marriage undermines the basis for the levies or invalidates them."

The key question(s) on Appeal: Whether notices of levy supported by spousal affidavits are defective when the underlying marriage was bigamous and void ab initio, requiring the judgment creditor to obtain a court order before levying on the purported spouse's separately-held accounts.

The Appellate Court held that notices of levy based on affidavits of spousal relationship are defective when the marriage is bigamous and void ab initio, because such marriages are invalid from inception regardless of formal annulment, making the spousal affidavit false and requiring the judgment creditor to obtain a court order before levying on accounts held separately by the bigamous spouse.

The case is inapplicable when the marriage is voidable rather than void, when accounts are held jointly with the judgment debtor, when a court order authorizing the levy has already been obtained, or when the levy is based on grounds other than the spousal relationship exception.

The case leaves open whether funds in the bigamous spouse's accounts may be subject to levy based on quasi-marital property theories, fraudulent conveyance claims, or other equitable considerations that would support a court-ordered levy.