Source: http://wyolawlibrary.blogspot.com/2009/03/summary-2009-wy-21.html
Timestamp: 2017-08-20 02:06:38
Document Index: 144418515

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 1']

Law Library Letter: Summary 2009 WY 21
Summary of Decision issued February 19, 2009
Case Name: Cook v. Swires
Citation: 2009 WY 21
Docket Number: S-08-0075
Representing Appellant Cook: William D. Bagley, Frontier Law Center, Cheyenne, Wyoming.
Representing Appellee Swires: M. Gregory Weisz, Pence and MacMillan, LLC, Laramie, Wyoming.
Facts/Discussion: The district court confirmed the execution sale of Cook’s Albany County real property to satisfy two Colorado judgments. On appeal, Cook claimed that the filing of the foreign judgments was insufficient pursuant to the Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act (UEFJA), the property was not available for execution, the district court did not allow him the proper redemption period and that he was entitled to seek contribution from his co-judgment debtors, including Swires. Swires contested Cook’s assertions and argued that the Court did not have subject matter jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction: Swires claimed that Cook did not file a timely notice of appeal of the district court’s determination that the Colorado judgments were filed correctly under the UEFJA. The Court ruled long ago that an order granting or refusing an injunction is a final appealable order as a petition for injunctive relief invokes a special proceeding. The Court concluded that the order denying the injunction was appealable, and because Cook failed to file a timely notice of appeal from the district court’s order, the Court did not have jurisdiction to review the district court’s decision on the validity of Mr. Claus’ filing under the UEFJA.
Expiration of Lien Under Section 1-17-336: Cook claims his real property was not available for execution by Swires because pursuant to § 1-17-336, the judgment lien expired one year after Claus’ 2000 filing of the Colorado judgments. In Dev-Tech the Court ruled that even though a judgment lien expires after one year and a judgment creditor may los his priority under § 1-17-336, the property still remained available for execution pursuant to § 1-17-301. thus, § 1-17-336 did not prevent Swires from executing against Cook’s Wyoming property.
Redemption Period: The Court concluded that although Cook’s property fell within the definition of agricultural real estate set out in § 1-18-103(c), the 12 month redemption period in subsection (b) was limited to mortgaged agricultural property. The district court ruled correctly that the general three month redemption period in subsection (a) governed in the case.
Contribution: Cook argued that he was entitled to contribution from Mr. and Mrs. Swires as they were also judgment debtors on the assigned Colorado judgments. The Court was perplexed by the argument because as far as the record showed, the district court ruled in Cooks’ favor on the issue. Under the current status of the record, Cook is entitled to contribution from the Swires if he has paid more than his proportionate share of the judgment debt.
Swires’ argument that Cook was not the real party in interest was not argued to the district court and so cannot be raised on appeal.
Conclusion: The Court concluded it did not have subject matter jurisdiction to consider the sufficiency of the foreign judgments filing because Cook did not appeal an earlier district court ruling on the issue. Even though a judgment lien expires after one year the property still remains available for execution pursuant to § 1-17-301. The redemption period of twelve months was limited to mortgaged agricultural property. As the district court stated, Cook is entitled to contribution for the Swires if he has paid more than his proportionate share of the judgment debt.
Link: http://tinyurl.com/c7qcb8 .
Posted by Meg Martin at 11:43 AM
Labels: 2009 summary, jurisdiction, timeliness, Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act