|
COMMENTARY |
| Item |
Origin |
Document |
COMMENT |
| 1 |
P |
Authenticated Copy of
Foreign Judgment Order
24
Aug 1999 |
This
document instantly becomes legally enforceable upon filing with any
Texas Clerk of Court. So if you receive notice of such being
filed against you, you had better take immediate action if you have a
defense against it. |
| 2 |
P |
Affidavit in Support of Filing
Foreign Judgment
24
Aug 1999 |
A
required document to Item 1. The Clerk of Court normally will
not process the Foreign Judgment without it, but its absence is merely
a correctable defect. |
| 3 |
P |
Notice of Filing
Foreign Judgment
24
Aug 1999 |
A
required document to Item 1. This is normally how a Defendant
will receive notice that a Foreign Judgment has been domesticated in
Texas. The Clerk of Court normally will not process the Foreign
Judgment without it, but its absence is merely a correctable defect.
The Clerk of Court has no way of knowing whether a Defendant actually
received it. While the Notice has a Cause Number and is styled
as a Lawsuit, it is in fact a completed cause and needs no further
action, ruling, or order from the Court to be enforceable.
|
| 4 |
P |
Certificate of Service
15
Sep 1999 |
The
Plaintiff is certifying that he has sent the Defendant a copy of Items
1, 2, & 3 above. Note that this Certificate of Service is dated
22 days after documents 1,2, &3 were filed with the Clerk of Court,
which is the normal response time limit given to a Defendant to
respond to a pleading. In the case of a Foreign Judgment, there is
some case law that opines that there is no time limit for the
Defendant to raise an affirmative defense. |
| 5 |
D |
Objection to Filing
Foreign Judgment
22
Sep 1999 |
In a
Foreign Judgment cause, all the filings of the Defendant are in the
nature of a cross-complaint. Defendant here is raising the
ten-year time limit for bringing a Foreign Judgment to Texas. The
defense must be pleaded, and until a Court rules in favor of the
Defendant, the now domesticated Foreign Judgment is enforceable
against me in Texas.
Defendant also attached an
Affidavit of Texas Residence and authenticated copies of
Texas drivers licenses, Texas voter certificates, and other
Texas-issued documents. |
| 6 |
P |
Letter Request
for Abstract of Texas Judgment
28 Sep 1999 |
Before a Judgment
can be enforced, the Clerk of Court must create an Abstract of the
Judgment, after which the Plaintiff may swear out a Writ of Attachment
for a Sheriff to seize non-exempt property to satisfy the
Judgment. The Plaintiff is requesting such an abstract.
However, in a Foreign Judgment cause, once a defense has been raised,
the Clerk of Court will usually delay action on creating an abstract.
The Clerk of Court is under no legal obligation to delay the abstract,
and if the Defendant is concerned, he may request a stay of execution.
|
| 7 |
D |
Motion for
Summary Judgment
24
Oct 1999 |
If
the Plaintiff had challenged the factual nature of any of the
Defendant's evidence in pleading the ten-year time limit, such as
whether the Defendant was a Texas resident, then such contested issues
would go to trial. In this particular case, the Plaintiff did
not contest the Defendant's evidence, and after the required response
time limit had expired, with no issues of fact in contention, the
Defendant moved for Summary Judgment. |
| 8 |
D |
Documents in Support of Motion for
Summary Judgment
4 Nov
1999 |
The
rules on motions for summary judgment require all the supporting
documents to be a part of the Motion for Summary Judgment. In
this particular case, additional documents were added after the motion
was filed. Whenever such additional documents are added, it
extends the non-movant's time to respond.
|
| 9 |
D |
Additional Documents in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment
9 Nov
1999 |
| 10 |
D |
Affidavit of Service
on Defendant
in Support of
Motion
for Summary Judgment
10
Nov 1999 |
This
was added by the Defendant to document the Plaintiff's Service on
Defendant, which had not been filed with the Clerk of Court.
This was necessary for Defendant to preserve his rights in the
possibility that the Plaintiff might claim the Defendant's response
was not timely. |
| 11 |
C |
Hearing
24 Nov 1999 |
In this Hearing,
the Plaintiff did not appear, and the Judge suggested the Hearing be
rescheduled so the Plaintiff's response time under the Rules would be
preserved (and not be grounds for an appeal.) |
| 12 |
D |
Notice of
Rescheduled Hearing
24 Nov 1999 |
The
hearing on Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is reset.
This is notice to the Plaintiff of the new hearing Date, Time, and
Place. |
| 13 |
P |
Plaintiff's Nonsuit
Without Prejudice
16 Dec 1999 |
Plaintiff sends the Defendant a Nonsuit Without Prejudice, which is a
smart move when it appears the cause is lost and he wants to preserve
his right to bring the cause again under more favorable circumstances.
In this particular case, it does not appear that this Nonsuit was ever
filed with the Clerk of Court. |
| 14 |
D |
Motion to Quash
Plaintiff's Nonsuit
28 Dec 1999 |
Defendant objects to a Nonsuit Without Prejudice, but suggests a
Dismissal With Prejudice would be acceptable. |
| 15 |
C |
Hearing
5 Jan 2000 |
At
this Hearing the Plaintiff again did not appear. The Defendant
provided a copy of Plaintiff's Nonsuit Without Prejudice to the Court,
and requested the Motion to Quash be combined with the Motion for
Summary Judgment. The Judge took the entire matter under advisement
for consideration. No ruling was rendered at this Hearing. |
| 16 |
P |
Plaintiff's Nonsuit
Without Prejudice
5 Jan 2000 |
Plaintiff's Nonsuit Without Prejudice
was given to the Court by the Fefendant at
the 5 January Hearing, formally entered into the Court Docket.
. |
| 17 |
P |
Plaintiff's Nonsuit
With Prejudice
7Jan 2000 |
Plaintiff formally files a Nonsuit With Prejudice, perhaps at the
suggestion of the Judge's staff, which might be considered as ex parte communication, but in this case it works in favor of the
Defendant. As Plaintiff's last filed
pleading, it would supplant his prior nonsuit without prejudice. |
| 18 |
C |
ORDER
12 Jan 2000 |
The final order is
what Defendant asked for, and close to what the Plaintiff asks
for in his last pleading, , except he asks for a "nonsuit," which in
Texas is not distinguished from a "dismissal." The "with prejudice" term
in the order means the Foreign Judgment
cannot be brought again in Texas, which is very important to me as Defendant.
The order is very short, but unlikely to be appealed
because both parties essentially and voluntarily ask for what is
essentially the same
outcome in Texas. |
|
P - Plaintiff submitted NOTE: Total time for this lawsuit, from
inception to final judgment, was just under 5 months.
D
- Defendant submitted
C
- before of by a judge
§
- refers to a section of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies
Code
Rule - refers to a rule of the
Texas Rules of Civil Procedure |
