Recognition of Judgment

Question 1

Core Things to Look for Re Conflicts Q’s

Answer 1

• look for conflicts issues when the facts include connections to multiple states
• usually combined w/ other subjects, especially family law, federal procedure, or torts

Question 2

Basic Conditions Raising Recognition of Judgment Q’s

Answer 2

• judgment has been entered by a court in one jurisdiction AND
• party is seeking to have that judgment recognized by a court in a different jurisdiction

Question 3

Rendering Jurisdiction

Answer 3

• the place where the judgment was originally entered

Question 4

Recognizing Jurisdiction

Answer 4

• the place where recognition is being sought

Question 5

Core Q Re Recognition

Answer 5

• “will the recognizing court recognize the judgment issued by the rendering court?”

Question 6

Reasons for a Party to Seek Recognition

Answer 6

• plaintiffs will most often seek recognition in order to access enforcement mechanisms in the rendering state
• defendants will most often seek to prevent pls from relitigating claim or issue

Question 7

Questions to Ask Yourself Re Recognition

Answer 7

I - is the rendering jur a sister state or a foreign country?

IIA - if a sister state:
-> are the reqs of full faith + credit satisfied?
-> are there any valid defenses?
-> recognition required when answer to #1 is yes and answer to #2 is no

IIB - if foreign country:
-> is foreign judgment entitled to comity?

Question 8

Sister State Judgments - Overview

Answer 8

• if rendering court = court in a sister state, then source of obligation to recognize the judgment is constitutional (Full Faith + Credit Clause applies)
• by statute, full faith + credit applies to recognition of judgments between fed courts + state courts

Question 9

Requirements for Full Faith + Credit

Answer 9

• rendering state must’ve had jurisdiction (both personal and subject matter)
• judgment must’ve been on the merits
• judgment must be final

Question 10

Exceptions to Jurisdictional Req

Answer 10

• when issue of jur has been fully + fairly litigated, the jurisdictional determination itself is entitled to full + faith credit
• pretty sure though waiver of pj would also qualify as “fully + fairly litigated”

Question 11

Examples of Judgments NOT on the Merits

Answer 11

• statute of limitations
• lack of jurisdiction (either personal or subject matter)
• misjoinder
• improper venue
• failure to state a claim (sometimes)

Question 12

Default Judgment

Answer 12

• treats all factual contentions as admitted -> means it qualifies as on the merits for full faith+ credit and recognition of judgment purposes
• couldn’t be used for issue preclusion b/c no actual issues determined

Question 13

Consent Judgment

Answer 13

• entered after settlement
• considered on the merits for purposes of recognition

Question 14

Finality - Wrinkles

Answer 14

• a judgment on appeal in the rendering jur is NOT final

Question 15

Which laws is used to determine the three reqs of full faith + credit

Answer 15

• whether 3 reqs met evaluated using the law of the rendering state
• BUT law of the enforcing state governs the method of enforcement

Question 16

Defenses to Full Faith + Credit

Answer 16

• penal judgments
• extrinsic fraud
• note that public policy and mistake are NOT defenses to full faith + credit
  -> ex: even if another state ct mistakenly applies your state’s law, your state would still need to recognize that judgment
  -> state can’t refuse to enforce a judgment just b/c its own public policy runs against it

Question 17

Penal Judgment

Answer 17

• one that punishes an offense against the public
  -> in practice, means the pl in the suit that led to the judgment was the state
• NOT entitled to full faith + credit

Question 18

Extrinsic Fraud

Answer 18

• fraud that could not be corrected during the regular course of proceedings leading to the judgment
• NOT entitled to full faith + credit

Question 19

Comity

Answer 19

• if rendering ct in a foreign country, source of ob to recognize judgment = comity or treaty
• RULE: under comity principles, recognizing court will exercise discretion to decide whether foreign judgment should be recognized
  -> many of same principles as full faith + credit considered to guide ct’s discretion (on merits? final?)
  -> BUT two additional q’s: jur (greater leeway) and fairness

Question 20

Comity - Jurisdiction

Answer 20

• different than full faith + credit b/c American court has greater leeway -> even if jur has already been litigated, American ct can decline to recognize the judgment on grounds of lack of jur (based on own determination)

Question 21

Comity - Fairness

Answer 21

• Am ct will assess whether procedures in foreign ct were fair
  -> ex: inability to call witnesses, to challenge the admissibility of ev, etc. -> Am court can conclude foreign judgment tainted by sham procedures + therefore not entitled to recognition