Utah Court of Appeals

Do child support liens automatically attach to revocable trust property? Harris v. DHHS Explained

2024 UT App 97
No. 20220252-CA
July 18, 2024
Affirmed

Summary

Harris purchased property at a trustee sale with notice of an ORS child support judgment lien against Webber, the property’s former beneficial owner through revocable trusts. Harris sought to quiet title, arguing the lien was unenforceable against trust property. The district court granted summary judgment for ORS, finding the lien attached to Webber’s beneficial interest in the trust property.

Analysis

Background and Facts

In 2011, Utah’s Office of Recovery Services (ORS) obtained a properly recorded judgment lien against Tyrone Boyd Webber for unpaid child support in Salt Lake County. At that time, property was held in two revocable trusts—the Tyrone Boyd Webber Trust and the Mary Ann Webber Trust. Webber was both trustee and settlor of his trust and trustee of his ex-wife’s trust. After their 2012 divorce, Lauritzen transferred her beneficial interest in the property to Webber. In 2016, Webber used the property as collateral for a personal loan, defaulted, and the lender foreclosed. Todd Harris purchased the property at the 2019 trustee sale with notice of ORS’s lien.

Key Legal Issues

The central issue was whether ORS’s child support judgment lien automatically attached to property held in revocable trusts where the debtor was the settlor with beneficial interest, or whether ORS was required to file separate litigation against the trusts. Harris argued that the trust structure shielded the property from the lien and sought to quiet title free of ORS’s claims.

Court’s Analysis and Holding

The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the judgment lien automatically attached to Webber’s beneficial interest in the trust property. Under Utah Code § 75-7-505(1), property of a revocable trust is subject to the settlor’s creditors during the settlor’s lifetime. The court emphasized that judgment liens attach to “beneficial and equitable property interests, even if the debtor has no record title.” The court rejected Harris’s argument that separate litigation was required, noting that Webber had the “functional equivalent” of ownership and had used the property as loan collateral.

Practice Implications

This decision reinforces that revocable trusts cannot shield property from a settlor’s creditors. Practitioners should advise clients that beneficial interests in revocable trusts remain subject to judgment liens without additional procedural requirements. For property purchasers, thorough title investigation must include potential liens against trust settlors and beneficiaries, not just record titleholders. The decision also confirms that state agencies like ORS benefit from streamlined lien enforcement procedures under Utah’s child support statutes.

Original Opinion

Link to Original Case

Case Details

Case Name

Harris v. DHHS

Citation

2024 UT App 97

Court

Utah Court of Appeals

Case Number

No. 20220252-CA

Date Decided

July 18, 2024

Outcome

Affirmed

Holding

A child support judgment lien automatically attaches to property held in a revocable trust where the debtor-settlor has beneficial interest, without requiring separate litigation against the trust.

Standard of Review

Correctness for legal conclusions and the ultimate grant or denial of summary judgment

Practice Tip

When representing clients purchasing property from trusts, always investigate potential judgment liens against settlors and beneficiaries, as beneficial interests remain subject to creditor claims despite the trust structure.

Need Appellate Counsel?

Lotus Appellate Law handles appeals before the Utah Court of Appeals, Utah Supreme Court, California Court of Appeal, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

Related Court Opinions

    • Utah Court of Appeals

    Eco Box Fabricators v. Zweigle

    September 24, 2020

    A party who stipulates to arbitration and expressly withdraws all objections to arbitration waives any argument that the arbitrator exceeded authority based on limitations in the underlying contract.
    • Appellate Procedure
    • |
    • Contract Interpretation
    Read More
    • Utah Supreme Court

    Salt Lake City v. Utah Inland Port Authority

    June 29, 2022

    The zoning provisions of the Utah Inland Port Authority Act do not violate the Uniform Operation of Laws Clause or Ripper Clause, but potential mootness issues require supplemental briefing on the tax provisions.
    • Constitutional Rights (Criminal)
    • |
    • Mootness
    • |
    • Standard of Review
    • |
    • Statutory Interpretation
    Read More
About these Decision Summaries

Lotus Appellate Law publishes these summaries to keep practitioners informed — not as legal advice. Each case turns on its own facts. If a decision here is relevant to your matter, we’re happy to discuss it.