Trauger v. A.J. Spagnol Lumber Co., Inc., 63130

Citation442 So.2d 182
Decision Date10 November 1983
Docket NumberNo. 63130,63130
PartiesCarl T. TRAUGER, et al., Appellants, v. A.J. SPAGNOL LUMBER COMPANY, INC., Appellee.
CourtFlorida Supreme Court

Julian R. Benjamin of Therrel, Baisden, Stanton, Wood and Setlin, Miami Beach, for appellants.

Robert B. Dunckel of Adler, Tolar & Adler, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

OVERTON, Justice.

This is an appeal from the decision of the Fourth District Court of Appeal in A.J. Spagnol Lumber Co. v. Trauger, 423 So.2d 956 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982), which held that section 55.05, Florida Statutes (1977), 1 violates the full faith and credit clause of the United States Constitution 2 to the extent that it prohibits enforcement of a foreign confessed judgment. We have jurisdiction, article V, section 3(b)(1), Florida Constitution, and affirm the decision of the district court.

The facts reflect that appellee, Spagnol, furnished building supplies on credit to appellant Trauger. Payment for these commercial transactions was secured by a series of promissory notes which, consistent with Pennsylvania law, Pa.Stat.Ann. tit. 12, § 739 (Purdon 1957), contained cognovit provisions authorizing confession of judgment in the event of default on the notes. Trauger defaulted, and Spagnol secured a final judgment against him in a Pennsylvania court. Trauger left Pennsylvania before the judgment could be enforced, going first to Puerto Rico and eventually coming to this state. When Spagnol located Trauger, it filed a Florida action to enforce the Pennsylvania judgment. Trauger answered and asserted as an affirmative defense that the Pennsylvania judgment was null and void under section 55.05 because it was based on a confession of judgment and, consequently, was secured without personal service.

The trial court found merit in Trauger's affirmative defense and, in a judgment on the pleadings, held that the judgment sought to be enforced was void in this state. The district court reversed, concluding in a thorough opinion that the legislature intended section 55.05 to operate to forbid confessions of judgment in Florida and to prohibit Florida courts from enforcing foreign judgments based on confessions of judgment. The district court held that the portion of the statute applying to foreign judgments was unconstitutional under both Florida and federal case law construing the full faith and credit clause of the United States Constitution. We agree.

The full faith and credit clause is part of an intricate constitutional scheme to weld the states of this country into a strong union. As expressed by the United States Supreme Court in Milwaukee County v. M.E. White Co., 296 U.S. 268, 276-77, 56 S.Ct. 229, 234, 80 L.Ed. 220 (1935):

The very purpose of the full faith and credit clause was to alter the status of the several states as independent foreign sovereignties, each free to ignore obligations created under the laws or by the judicial proceedings of the others, and to make them integral parts of a single nation throughout which a remedy upon a just obligation might be demanded as of right, irrespective of the state of its origin. That purpose ought not lightly to be set aside out of deference to a local policy which, if it exists, would seem to be too trivial to merit serious consideration when weighed against the policy of the constitutional provision and the interest of the state whose judgment is challenged.

The clause requires each state to recognize the judgments obtained in courts of sister states in order to prevent one state from selectively enforcing the laws of the others. Morris v. Jones, 329 U.S. 545, 67 S.Ct. 451, 91 L.Ed. 488 (1947). The full faith and credit clause does not, however, protect a judgment which was entered by a court that did not have personal or subject matter jurisdiction in the action, Milliken v. Meyer, 311 U.S. 457, 61 S.Ct. 339, 85 L.Ed. 278 (1940), or where the judgment has been paid, discharged, or procured by fraud. Milwaukee County.

Trauger contends that this judgment, which he concedes is proper under the laws of Pennsylvania and constitutional under the United States Constitution, 3 should be denied full faith and credit because a judgment based on a confession of judgment is contrary to the public policy of the State of Florida, as expressed in section 55.05. An action to recover on a foreign judgment is completely independent from the original cause of action. It is the judgment from the other state which forms the basis for the cause of action, and the validity of the claim on which the foreign judgment was entered is not open to inquiry. Milliken. Although the Florida legislature has the power to prohibit Florida courts from recognizing confessions of judgment under the law of this state, it violates the full faith and credit clause by extending this prohibition to interfere with the laws of other states which allow the use of confessions of judgment. The courts of Florida cannot be empowered by the legislature to review the underlying cause of action when a person seeks to enforce a foreign judgment in this state.

Trauger's counsel conceded in oral argument that Spagnol's judgment...

To continue reading

Request your trial
21 cases
  • Horizon Bank, Nat'l Ass'n v. Marshalls Point Retreat LLC
    • United States
    • Wisconsin Supreme Court
    • March 6, 2018
    ...was to make enforceable 908 N.W.2d 815in Florida the monetary judgment entered in Wisconsin. See Trauger v. A.J. Spagnol Lumber Co., 442 So.2d 182, 183 (Fla. 1983) ("An action to recover on a foreign judgment is completely independent from the original cause of action. It is the judgment fr......
  • Arthur v. JP Morgan Chase Bank
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit
    • June 13, 2014
    ...power to deny state substantive rights nor power to create a right that would be denied under state law); Trauger v. A.J. Spagnol Lumber Co., 442 So. 2d 182, 183 (Fla. 1983) (stating that the Florida courts must "recognize the judgments obtained in courts of sister states in order to preven......
  • Brandon-Thomas v. Brandon-Thomas
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • April 24, 2015
    ...in the courts of other states to prevent one state from selectively enforcing the laws of the others. See Trauger v. A.J. Spagnol Lumber Co., 442 So.2d 182, 183 (Fla.1983) (citing Morris v. Jones, 329 U.S. 545, 67 S.Ct. 451, 91 L.Ed. 488 (1947) ). By requiring each state to respect the laws......
  • Weiss v. Weiss
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • November 14, 2012
    ...S.Ct. 339, 85 L.Ed. 278 (1940).” M & R Invs. Co. v. Hacker, 511 So.2d 1099, 1101 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987) (quoting Trauger v. A.J. Spagnol Lumber Co., 442 So.2d 182, 183 (Fla.1983)). This is because “[a] foreign order of contempt is entitled to full faith and credit in Florida if it is valid in ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Credit and collections
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Florida Small-Firm Practice Tools - Volume 1-2 Volume 1
    • April 1, 2023
    ...that judgments entered in another state be enforced and given full faith and credit. [ Trauger v. A.J. Spagnol Lumber Co., Inc. , 442 So.2d 182, 183 (Fla. 1983).] If, however, the foreign court did not have personal or subject matter jurisdiction, or the judgment was paid, discharged, or pr......

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