Pope v. Gordon
| Decision Date | 17 June 2005 |
| Docket Number | No. 1031384.,1031384. |
| Citation | 922 So.2d 893 |
| Parties | Max C. POPE, as trustee of the bankruptcy estate of Hugh Don Camp v. Tony GORDON et al. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Jerry W. Schoel and David D. Schoel of The Schoel Law Firm, Birmingham, for plaintiff.
R. Scott Williams and Michael C. Skotnicki of Haskell Slaughter Young & Rediker, LLC, Birmingham, for defendants.
Pursuant to Rule 18, Ala. R.App. P., this Court accepted the following certified question from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Alabama, Southern Division:
"Does Ala.Code [1975,] § 6-9-237 require the filing of (i) an unauthenticated or unexemplified copy of a foreign judgment in the Probate Office, (ii) a mere copy of the authenticated foreign judgment which was filed in the Alabama circuit court clerk's office, or (iii) an authenticated copy of such a foreign judgment?"
In January 2001, Tony Gordon, Tim Gordon, and Julian Gordon obtained various judgments against Hugh Don Camp in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi ("the Mississippi judgments"). In an effort to collect those judgments, the Gordons attempted to create liens in Alabama against property owned by Camp located in Etowah, St. Clair, and Blount Counties1 by filing the Mississippi judgments with the clerks of the circuit courts located in those counties. Those filings included copies of the Mississippi judgments with exemplification certificates attached setting forth that the copies of the judgments so filed were true copies. The Gordons also filed in each of the circuit courts an affidavit of their counsel, in which he attested (1) that he represented the Gordons; (2) that the address given in the affidavit for the Gordons was their correct address; (3) that the address given in the affidavit for Camp was Camp's last known address; and (4) that the Mississippi judgments were valid, enforceable, and unsatisfied. Each circuit court docketed the case as a nonjury civil action involving "foreign judgments." The Gordons also filed copies of the Mississippi judgments in the offices of the judges of probate of Etowah, St. Clair, and Blount Counties. The copies filed in the probate judges' offices had no exemplification certificates attached and were otherwise unauthenticated.
Pursuant to Ala.Code 1975, § 6-9-233, Camp was given notice that the Mississippi judgments had been filed in the circuit courts of Etowah, St. Clair, and Blount Counties. The circuit courts subsequently purported to enter judgments in favor of the Gordons based on the Mississippi judgments.
In September 2001, a petition of bankruptcy was filed against Camp in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Alabama, Southern Division ("the Bankruptcy Court"). On September 18, 2002, Max C. Pope was appointed trustee of the bankruptcy estate.
On September 23, 2003, Pope filed a complaint in the Bankruptcy Court seeking, among other things, a declaration that the Gordons had no liens against property owned by Camp in Etowah, St. Clair, and Blount Counties. Pope later moved for a summary judgment, arguing that the Gordons had not properly perfected a lien on Camp's property in those counties.
The Bankruptcy Court, in an extensive and scholarly memorandum opinion, held that the Gordons had failed to use any of several options for enforcing the Mississippi judgments and securing proper liens in Alabama. In re Camp, 310 B.R. 634 (Bankr.N.D.Ala.2004). The Bankruptcy Court did note, however, that it was unclear whether the Gordons had properly secured a lien under Ala.Code 1975, § 6-9-237, which the Bankruptcy Court believes is ambiguous. The Bankruptcy Court thus certified this question.
Alabama has adopted the Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act (Rev. 1964) ("UEFJA"). See Act No. 86-713, Ala. Acts 1986, codified at Ala.Code 1975, § 6-9-230 et seq. ("the Act"). The Act provides a means by which a foreign judgment can be "domesticated" in this State. First, to domesticate a foreign judgment, a judgment creditor may file a copy of the foreign judgment in any circuit court in the State:
Ala.Code 1975, § 6-9-232. This provision has been understood to require that the copy of the foreign judgment filed in circuit court be an authenticated copy. See, e.g., Ex parte Lyon Fin. Servs., Inc., 775 So.2d 181, 183 (Ala.2000), and Nix v. Cassidy, 899 So.2d 998, 1000 (Ala.Civ.App. 2004). See also Rule 44(a)(1), Ala. R. Civ. P. (), and Gilpin Brokerage Co. v. Northwest Acceptance Corp., 465 So.2d 1161 (Ala.Civ.App.1985) ().
At the same time that the authenticated foreign judgment is filed, the judgment creditor must file an informational affidavit with the clerk of the court in compliance with the requirements of Ala.Code 1975, § 6-9-233(a):
After both the foreign judgment and the informational affidavit have been filed in the circuit court, the clerk is required to mail notice to the judgment debtor in compliance with Ala.Code 1975, § 6-9-233(b):
Alabama Code 1975, § 6-9-233(c), then provides:
"(c) No execution or other process for enforcement of a foreign judgment filed hereunder shall issue until 30 days after the date the judgment is filed."
Finally, Ala.Code 1975, § 6-9-235, requires the payment of a filing fee.
At the completion of these filing requirements, the foreign judgment becomes domesticated.2 A judgment creditor may then create a lien on the judgment debtor's property by obtaining a certificate of judgment from the circuit court and filing that certificate in the office of the judge of probate of any county. See Ala.Code 1975, § 6-9-210.3 This filing creates a lien on property of the judgment debtor in that county. See Ala.Code 1975, § 6-9-211.
The Bankruptcy Court held that the Gordons had properly domesticated the Mississippi judgments under the Act. Camp, 310 B.R. at 645. Authenticated copies of the judgments were filed in the circuit courts of Etowah, St. Clair, and Blount Counties in accord with § 6-9-232; the Gordons' counsel filed an informational affidavit in compliance with § 6-9-233(a); proper notice to Camp of the filing of the judgments was accomplished under § 6-9-233(b); and the 30-day period of § 6-9-233(c) had elapsed. The Gordons did not, however, file a certificate of judgment issued by any of the circuit courts in the office of the judge of probate in any county.
The Bankruptcy Court noted that in this case the Gordons had another option available under the Act. Specifically, a judgment creditor may use Ala.Code 1975, § 6-9-237, which provides:
"A copy of a foreign judgment authenticated in the manner described in Section 6-9-232 and filed in the circuit court may be recorded in the probate office as provided for judgments of the circuit courts of this state, and its being so filed shall have the same force and effect as the filing of a certificate of a judgment obtained in a circuit court of this state."
Section 6-9-237 is a nonuniform addition to Alabama's version of the UEFJA, which provides for the creation of a judgment lien by the recordation of a foreign judgment. Clearly, § 6-9-237 was designed to provide a simpler, quicker process for effecting a lien in conjunction with a domesticated foreign judgment than would otherwise be available under the alternative procedure of obtaining a certificate of judgment issued from the clerk of the circuit court in which the informational affidavit and the authenticated foreign judgment had been filed.
The Bankruptcy Court noted, however, that precisely what must be filed in the probate office was unclear:
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Alabama Department of Corrections v. Montgomery County Commission, No. 1051455 (Ala. 6/27/2008)
...Court does not interpret provisions in isolation, but considers them in the context of the entire statutory scheme.' Pope v. Gordon, 922 So. 2d 893, 897 (Ala. 2005). The Court must `look to the entire act instead of isolated phrases or clauses.' Id. "The first sentence of Ala. Code § 14-3-3......
-
Boutwell v. State
...moreover, to ascertain legislative intent, a court should look to the entire act instead of isolated phrases or clauses. Pope v. Gordon, 922 So.2d 893, 897 (Ala.2005); Siegelman v. Alabama Ass'n of School Bds., 819 So.2d 568, 582 (Ala.2001); Ex parte Employees' Retirement Sys. of Alabama, 6......
-
Ex Parte State, No. 1050299 (Ala. 9/8/2006)
...moreover, to ascertain legislative intent, a court should look to the entire act instead of isolated phrases or clauses. Pope v. Gordon, 922 So. 2d 893, 897 (Ala. 2005); Siegelman v. Alabama Ass'n of School Bds., 819 So. 2d 568, 582 (Ala. 2001); Ex parte Employees' Retirement Sys. of Alabam......
-
State v. Haynes
...the entire act instead of isolated phrases or clauses. Lambert v. Wilcox County Comm'n, 623 So.2d 727, 729 (Ala.1993)." Pope v. Gordon, 922 So.2d 893, 897 (Ala. 2005). Section 13A-12-260(a), Ala.Code 1975, sets out a non-exclusive list of items that constitute drug paraphernalia. That list ......