We sued the business. I understand that the store manager isn't responsible for satisfying the judgment but he's the only contact we have. We're not trying to collect from him; we're trying to get him to contact the store owner. Even before we ended up suing, the store manager kept promising to contact the store owner to pay for the damages caused by their deliverymen before he ended up ghosting us and leaving us no choice but to sue for the money. They never even showed up for court. No idea who their attorney is, either.
A point has been made here that seems worthy of further discussion. To explain:
You write that you "
sued the business"; the ''
business" did not appear to contest your complaint resulting in the default judgment. And that the
"business" is ignoring your demands for satisfaction of the judgment.
I'm going with Q and ajax and suggest that the reason for being ignored might be because you have failed to correctly name the responsible party and/or the named party was not properly served with process. It would not be uncommon in a small claims setting for a claimant to sue a d/b/a and not the legal entity using the fictitious business name. Or knowing the identity of the legal entity not knowing how to effect service of process.
And just because some small claims judge may have entered a default against the name appearing in your complaint doesn't necessary mean that you have complied with the above; that the judge's action was proper.
Another aspect is now presented and that is these "deliverymen" (plural). Did you sue the business owner's "
deliverymen" as well as the owner of the business. If not, why did you choose not to join the deliverymen? What proof did you present to the court to establish that the persons that allegedly damaged your property were acting in the employment of the business owner and not as independent contractors?
Whatever, take a certified copy of your judgment to an licensed bill collector. They can tell you whether it is worth more than the paper it is written on.