Johnson Bros. Wholesale Liquor Co. v. Clemmons

Citation233 Kan. 405,661 P.2d 1242
Decision Date29 April 1983
Docket NumberNo. 54890,54890
PartiesJOHNSON BROTHERS WHOLESALE LIQUOR CO., Plaintiff/Appellee, v. Bruce CLEMMONS, Defendant/Appellant.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Kansas

Syllabus by the Court

1. The Full Faith and Credit Clause of the United States Constitution, Article IV, Section 1, does not prevent the forum state from applying its own statute of limitations to a sister state's judgments, provided the statute of limitations of the forum does not discriminate against out-of-state judgments and does not deny, unreasonably restrict, or oppressively burden the right to bring such an action to enforce such judgment.

2. Where an action is brought in another state upon a judgment of a sister state which is a revival of an earlier judgment and under the law of the state rendering the revival judgment, it is a new judgment and not merely an extension of the statutory period in which to enforce the original judgment, a judgment of revival, as a new judgment, is entitled to full faith and credit and may not be refused enforcement on the ground that under the law of the forum the original judgment could not have been revived at the time it was revived by the judgment of the sister state.

3. In an action on a foreign judgment, its nature, validity, and finality are to be tested by the law of the jurisdiction where the judgment was rendered.

Kenneth F. Crockett, of Tilton, Dillon, Beck & Crockett, Topeka, argued the cause and was on briefs for appellant.

Robert L. Baer, of Cosgrove, Webb & Oman, Topeka, argued the cause, and J. Craig Anderson, Topeka, was with him on briefs for appellee.

PRAGER, Justice:

This is a proceeding to enforce a Minnesota judgment under the Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act, K.S.A. 60-3001 et seq. The plaintiff-appellee is Johnson Brothers Wholesale Liquor Co. The defendant-appellant is Bruce Clemmons.

The facts in the case are not in dispute and are as follows: On May 14, 1971, the plaintiff obtained a judgment in Minnesota against the defendant and others in the amount of $39,402.78. This judgment was rendered by the district court of Ramsey County, Minnesota. On December 7, 1971, the plaintiff filed an action in the district court of Shawnee County based upon the Minnesota judgment. The Kansas court entered summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff on February 15, 1972, in the amount of $39,402.78 plus interest. On May 9, 1972, plaintiff attempted to levy execution on the property of the defendant but the execution was returned unsatisfied. Thereafter, no additional action was taken by plaintiff on that Kansas judgment, and it became dormant under the provisions of K.S.A. 60-2403. Plaintiff failed to revive that judgment within two years after the date the judgment became dormant as required by K.S.A. 60-2404.

On September 24, 1973, plaintiff received payment of the sum of $12,902.22 in partial satisfaction of the plaintiff's judgment from a trustee in bankruptcy appointed by a federal court in Minnesota. Thereafter, no further action was taken by the plaintiff upon its 1971 Minnesota judgment until May of 1981 when plaintiff initiated an action in the district court of Ramsey County, Minnesota, based upon the 1971 Minnesota judgment. The record shows that personal service in that action was made on the defendant in Shawnee County on May 12, 1981. On July 16, 1981, the district court of Ramsey County, Minnesota, entered a new judgment in favor of the plaintiff in the amount of $46,418.25 and costs. Thereafter, the plaintiff filed its 1981 Minnesota judgment in the district court of Shawnee County and proceeded to enforce the same in compliance with the Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act (K.S.A. 60-3001 et seq.).

On April 27, 1982, the district court of Shawnee County entered judgment in favor of the plaintiff holding the 1981 Minnesota judgment to be properly filed and enforceable under the uniform act. The defendant has brought a timely appeal to this court.

The primary issue presented in the case is whether the 1981 Minnesota judgment is enforceable under the factual circumstances set forth above. In determining this issue we must consider the Kansas statute of limitations, the Kansas statutes pertaining to dormant judgments and revivor of the same, and the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the United States Constitution, Article IV, Section 1.

K.S.A. 60-3001 defines a foreign judgment to include any judgment, decree, or order of any other court which is entitled to full faith and credit in this state. K.S.A. 60-3002 provides that a judgment filed pursuant to the act has the same effect and is subject to the same procedures, defenses, and proceedings as a judgment of a district court of this state and may be enforced or satisfied in like manner. K.S.A. 60-3006 declares that the right of a judgment creditor to bring an action to enforce his or her judgment instead of proceeding under the uniform act remains unimpaired.

The Kansas statute of limitations governing actions brought on foreign judgments is K.S.A. 60-511(5) which sets a period of limitation of five years for an action for relief not provided for otherwise in the article governing the statute of limitations. See Leonard v. Kleitz, 155 Kan. 626, 127 P.2d 421 (1942); Rice v. Moore, 48 Kan. 590, 30 Pac. 10 (1892); Alexander Construction Co. v. Weaver, 3 Kan.App.2d 298, 594 P.2d 248 (1979). In passing, it should be noted that K.S.A. 60-516 provides that where the cause of action has arisen in another state and where the cause of action cannot be maintained thereon by reason of lapse of time, no action can be maintained in this state except in favor of one who is a resident of this state and who has held the cause of action from the time it accrued.

K.S.A. 60-2403 provides, in substance, that if execution shall not be sued out within five years from the date of any judgment rendered in any court of record of this state or within five years from the date of any order reviving such judgment or, if five years have intervened between the date of the last execution issued on any judgment and the time of suing out another writ of execution thereon, such judgment shall become dormant and shall cease to operate as a lien on the estate of the judgment debtor. When a judgment shall become dormant and shall so remain for a period of two years, it is the duty of the clerk of the court to release the judgment of record.

K.S.A. 60-2404 provides, in substance, that a dormant judgment may be revived within two years of the date on which such judgment became...

To continue reading

Request your trial
20 cases
  • Jordache Enterprises v. NAT. UNION FIRE INS.
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • November 24, 1998
    ...the issues decided and whether a judgment is on the merits" (footnote omitted).); and Kansas, Johnson Bros. Wholesale Liquor Co. v. Clemmons, 233 Kan. 405, 661 P.2d 1242 (1983), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936, 104 S.Ct. 345, 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983) (Validity and finality of foreign judgments are ......
  • Inv. Assocs. v. Summit Assocs., Inc.
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • August 27, 2013
    ...of the judgment, or in which a new period of limitations attaches to the revived judgment.8 See, e.g., Johnson Bros. Wholesale Liquor Co. v. Clemmons, 233 Kan. 405, 408, 661 P.2d 1242, cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936, 104 S.Ct. 345, 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); Union National Bank v. Lamb, 360 Mo. 81,......
  • Padron v. Lopez
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • November 25, 2009
    ...to enforce a judgment instead of proceeding under the Foreign Judgments Act remains unimpaired); Johnson Brothers Wholesale Liquor Co. v. Clemmons, 233 Kan. 405, 407, 661 P.2d 1242 (1983); see Warner v. Warner, 9 Kan.App.2d 6, 8, 668 P.2d 193 (1983); see also 5 Gard and Casad, Kansas Law & ......
  • Le Credit Lyonnais, SA v. Nadd
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • September 10, 1999
    ...Act could be revived pursuant to the forum state's law and procedures, not the rendering state's); Johnson Bros. Wholesale Liquor Co. v. Clemmons, 233 Kan. 405, 661 P.2d 1242 (1983) (foreign judgment revived in originating state could be recorded and enforced in forum state); Vrozos v. Sara......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • Conflict of Laws in Kansas: a Guide to Navigating the Dismal Swamp
    • United States
    • Kansas Bar Association KBA Bar Journal No. 71-8, August 2002
    • Invalid date
    ...Newell v. Harrison Engineering & Constr. Corp., 149 Kan. 838, 89 P.2d 869 (1939); see also Johnson Bros. Wholesale Liquor Co. v. Clemmons, 233 Kan. 405, 661 P.2d 1242, cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 (1983) (Kansas statute limiting time to enforce judgments applicable to foreign judgments regist......
  • 1999 Legislative Wrap Up
    • United States
    • Kansas Bar Association KBA Bar Journal No. 68-08, August 1999
    • Invalid date
    ...at the time the judgment is filed in Kansas. The latter provision effectively overrules Johnson Brothers Wholesale Liquor Co. v. Clemmons, 233 Kan. 405, 661 P.2 1242 (1983), holding that the Kansas statute of limitations on a foreign judgment begins to run when the judgment is originally re......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT