Opinion ID: 2515364
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Expiration of Lien Under Section 1-17-336

Text: [¶ 16] Mr. Cook claims that his real property was not available for execution by Mr. Swires because, pursuant to § 1-17-336, the judgment lien expired one year after Mr. Claus' 2000 filing of the Colorado judgments. Section 1-17-336 states: A judgment on which execution is not levied before the expiration of one (1) year after its rendition shall not operate as a lien on the estate of a debtor. When judgment is rendered in the district or supreme court and a special mandate is awarded to the district court to carry the same into execution, the lien of the judgment creditor shall continue for one (1) year after the mandate is filed with the county clerk. The special mandate shall be entered on the journal of the district court before being filed with the county clerk. In computing the period of one (1) year, the time covered by an appeal of the case, by an injunction against the execution, by a vacancy in the office of sheriff or by the inability of the officer, shall be excluded. [¶ 17] We interpret statutes to effectuate the legislature's intent. If the wording is clear and unambiguous, we give effect to the plain language of the statute. We apply rules of statutory construction only if the statutory language is ambiguous or subject to varying interpretations. Statutory interpretation is a question of law that we review de novo. Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 2007 WY 43, ¶¶ 9-10, 13, 154 P.3d 331, 334-35 (Wyo. 2007); Powder River Coal Co. v. Wyoming State Bd. of Equalization, 2002 WY 5, ¶ 6, 38 P.3d 423, 426 (Wyo. 2002). We discussed § 1-17-336 in Dev-Tech Corp. v. Wilson, Miller, Barton & Peek, Inc., 2004 WY 163, ¶ 25, 102 P.3d 880, 887 (Wyo. 2004): [T]his statute addresses the time in which a filed judgment operates as a lien. Section 1-17-336 does not state that the judgment creditor's rights to execute on the debtor's property expire. Instead, it states that, if there is no execution within a year, the judgment ceases to operate as a lien. This may affect priority, but it does not affect the property available for execution. Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 1-17-301 governs the property available for execution, and it states: Except for property exempt by law, all property of the judgment debtor, both real and personal or any legal or equitable interest therein including any interest of the judgment debtor in mortgaged property or property being sold under an executory land contract, is subject to execution. As such, even if their lien had expired, the appellees could still execute on the Trails End Ranch. This Court clearly ruled in Dev-Tech that, even though a judgment lien expires after one year and a judgment creditor may lose his priority under § 1-17-336, the property still remains available for execution pursuant to § 1-17-301. Thus, § 1-17-336 did not prevent Mr. Swires from executing against Mr. Cook's Wyoming property. [¶ 18] Although his argument is not entirely clear, Mr. Cook also seems to assert that the loss of the judgment lien under § 1-17-336 meant that Mr. Swires no longer had a secured interest in the real property and execution against the Wyoming property violated the terms of Mr. Cook's bankruptcy stay and discharge. Mr. Claus filed the foreign judgments in Wyoming in early 2000. Mr. Cook filed for bankruptcy in November 2001, which was more than a year after the foreign judgments were filed. The bankruptcy court determined that Mr. Swires had a secured interest in Mr. Cook's real property pursuant to the assigned foreign judgments. As the district court recognized, there is no indication in the record that Mr. Cook challenged the legitimacy of Mr. Swires' secured claim in the bankruptcy court even though more than one year had passed since the foreign judgments were filed in Wyoming. Consequently, the district court properly gave effect to the bankruptcy court's determination that the debt was secured and concluded that Mr. Cook's property was available for execution.