concurring in result.
I concur in the majority’s decision to reverse the trial court and grant to Kirk’s motion to dismiss the proceedings supplemental. Once Kirk showed on June 4,1991 he possessed no non-exempt property, the trial court should have granted his June 11, 1991 motion to dismiss the proceedings supplemental, subject to a subsequent proper allegation by Monroe County Tire that Kirk’s situation had changed.
I dissent, however, from the majority’s critique of the trial court’s decision to hold several hearings and examine Kirk.
This is a small claims proceeding. It is therefore subject to the provisions of the Small Claims Rules. Ind.Small Claims Rule 11(C) and (D) provide:
(C) The court may order a judgment paid the prevailing party in any specified manner. If the judgment is not paid as ordered the court may modify its payment order as it deems necessary.
(D) The judgment creditor may seek enforcement of his judgment by any other method provided by law....
(Emphasis added.) Small claims proceedings are meant to be expedited, with attendant reduction in time and expense for both plaintiff and defendant. Thus, to ensure the collection of a small claims judgment, S.C.R. 11(C) authorizes the judge in a small claims case to use methods beyond those allowed in other civil proceedings. Of course, S.C.R. 11(C) does not empower the judge to harass a judgment debtor, but the judge is empowered to use his or her full discretion to enforce a judgment. My reading of S.C.R. 11(C) is underscored by the version of S.C.R. 11(C) and (D) in effect prior to January 1, 1981:
(C) The court may order a judgment paid the prevailing party in any specified manner. If the judgment is not paid as ordered the court may modify its payment order as it deems necessary.
(D) 1. When a judgment is not paid according to its terms the judgment creditor shall first make a good faith effort to personally contact the judgment debt- or. If such action does not effectuate payment the court clerk may be requested to contact the judgment debtor. The clerk shall make such contact by telephone or mail and shall request payment *1371of the judgment according to its terms. The judgment debtor shall also be advised of any action which may be taken against him if payment is not forthcoming.
2. Should the informal procedure provided by S.C. 11(D)(1) prove ineffective, the judgment creditor may then enforce his judgment by any method provided by law....
Indiana Rules of Court, Small Claims Rule 11(C) and (D) (West 1980) (emphasis added).
Under the prior rule, then, court clerks had a duty to try to collect small claims judgments, and judgment creditors were required to refrain from seeking other means of enforcement until the clerk had tried informal methods. This rule gave clerks an increased work-load and too much authority, and was changed. In the 11 years since court clerks were removed from the collection process and judgment creditors were allowed to seek enforcement at an early stage, the authority provided the judge by S.C.R. 11(C) has remained undiminished. Indeed, even though S.C.R. 11(C) is captioned “Method of Payment. Modification,” and subsection (D) is captioned “Collection,” I submit that with the removal of court clerks from the process, the responsibility of the judge to remain aware of the status of small claims judgments is greater than before January 1, 1981. In the classic case, as this is, the judgment creditor will move for proceedings supplemental, a method of enforcement provided by law, and the judge will then conduct hearings until a payment plan is developed or the debtor shows exempt status.
In my view, today’s decision will have the adverse effect of chilling trial judges in the exercise of their duty to ensure that small claims judgments, and orders relating to those judgments, are adhered to by litigants. In turn, the enforcement of small claims judgments by judgment creditors will become a more expensive and time-consuming process than is presently the case, thereby subverting the purposes of small claims proceedings and the Small Claims Rules.
I concur in the result, but do not join in chastising the trial judge for discharging his duties imposed under the Small Claims Rules.