Recognition of Judgments Flashcards
(41 cards)
What is the first step in any conflict of laws analysis?
Does the court deciding the case have proper jurisdiction?
Under what circumstances do recognition of judgments issues arise?
Where a judgment has been previously issued by a rendering court and a party is seeking to have that judgment recognized and enforced in a second court (the recognizing court). This can be where a plaintiff is seeking recognition in order to access the recognizing jurisdiction’s enforcement mechanisms or where a defendant is seeking recognition for preclusive purposes.
When the rendering jurisdiction is a sister state, what analysis is applied?
(1) Are the Constitutional requirements of full faith and credit satisfied?
(2) Are there any valid defenses?
What if the recognition of judgments issues arise between a federal and a state court?
The full faith and credit analysis applies in the same ways as it does between sister states by federal statute.
What are the full faith and credit requirements?
(1) There must have been proper jurisdiction in the rendering court over both the parties and the subject matter.
(2) The judgment must have been on the merits.
(3) The judgment must have been final.
This is all determined using the law of the rendering jurisdiction.
What is the “bootstrap doctrine”?
To be accorded full faith and credit, the rendering court must have had personal and subject matter jurisdiction in the original action. However, where the question of jurisdiction was already fully and fairly litigated in the rendering court, that determination itself is res judicata and given full faith and credit without inquiry into whether the determination was erroneous.
When is a judgment “on the merits”?
To be accorded full faith and credit, the rendering court’s judgment must have been on the merits, meaning it involved the substance of the plaintiff’s claim.
What are common examples of decisions not on the merits?
Judgments predicated on procedural grounds like misjoinder, improper venue, lack of personal jurisdiction, statutes of limitations, or plaintiff’s lack of capacity
When is a judgment on a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim on the merits?
Such a judgment is on the merits if dismissed with prejudice and not if the plaintiff can amend their pleading to state a clause of action.
Are default and consent judgments on the merits?
Yes, they give rise to res judicata effects and are given full faith and credit. Note that they do not give rise to collateral estoppel (issue preclusion) because the issues themselves were not actually litigated.
When is a judgment final?
To be accorded full faith and credit, the rendering court’s judgment must have been final. Finality means that no further judicial action by the rendering court is necessary to resolve litigation.
Is a case being appealed considered final?
No, not until the appeal is concluded.
Is a modifiable divorce decree final for purposes of being accorded full faith and credit?
In the majority of jurisdictions, the decree will only be enforceable in another state based on full faith and credit with regards to past due installments not subject to retroactive modification. It will not be final with regards to future payments or payments which still may be modified. A minority accord full faith and credit.
Under what law are the requirements for full faith and credit analyzed?
The law of the state that rendered the judgment.
What are the possible valid defenses to full faith and credit?
(1) Penal judgments do not have to be enforced.
(2) The judgment is subject to equitable defenses in the rendering state – usually extrinsic fraud.
When is a judgment penal?
If it is imposed as a punishment for an offense to the public (never applicable to a judgment in favor of a private plaintiff on account of their injury).
Are foreign judgments for taxes penal?
No, they are entitled to full faith and credit.
What is the most common kind of equitable defense to full faith and credit?
Extrinsic fraud
What is extrinsic fraud?
Fraud which could not have been corrected during the regular course of proceedings involving collateral circumstances. E.g., bribing a judge; fabrication of evidence; misrepresentation causing the other party not to present case fully or comply with procedural requirements. Intrinsic fraud is not a valid defense.
Is public policy a defense to full faith and credit?
No.
Is mistake in judgment by the rendering court a defense to full faith and credit?
No. Those should be challenged through appeal in the rendering state.
If full faith and credit is applicable, what must be determined?
(1) What are the res judicata effects?
(2) Who may be bound by the former judgment?
What are the types of res judicata effect?
(1) Merger – when the final judgment is rendered and plaintiff prevails, the plaintiff’s cause of action is merged into the judgment, foreclosing them from maintaining a new suit on the same cause of action. (The defendant cannot relitigate the merits either.)
(2) Bar – when a final judgment is rendered in favor of the defendant, the plaintiff is barred from suing them again on the same cause of action?
(3) Collateral estoppel (a/k/a issue preclusion) – An issue resolved in the first litigation and raised again in a second suit will be binding on the parties to the second suit where it was (a) actually litigated, (b) essential to the judgment, and (c), if raised non mutually, the estopped party must have been given a full and fair opportunity to be heard on the issue (traditionally could not be done).
Who will be bound by a former judgment?
The parties and their privies (those persons whose interests have been represented by a party to the action – e.g., beneficiaries, holders of future interests, successors in interest, class members).
