Appellant's Right to Enforce Awarded Costs Despite Alleged Assignment

The appellant sought definitive clearance for court-awarded party costs, which a lower court had denied because the appellant had allegedly assigned these claims to their lawyer via a power of attorney form, rendering the appellant lacking dispositional power at the time of debt enforcement. The appellate commission overturned this, reasoning that the enforcement judge's role under Article 80 of the Debt Enforcement and Bankruptcy Act is merely to verify the identity between the creditor named in the enforceable title and the party initiating enforcement, and since the title named the appellant, they were sufficiently legitimized; further inquiry into potential assignments to third parties, which could involve complex issues like the current validity of the assignment or lack of proper notification to the debtor, is beyond the scope of the procedural enforcement review of definitive clearance.