CLAIRE WHIPPLE, APPELLANT,
v.
JSZ FINANCIAL COMPANY, INC., APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A judgment debtor who timely challenged a Texas judgment for lack of personal jurisdiction was unable to proceed with that challenge after the creditor levied execution on the debtor's automobile and collected payment. The court reversed, holding that involuntary payment compelled by execution does not waive a pending challenge to a judgment's validity.
The court held that when satisfaction of a judgment results from payment compelled under levy of execution, a pending challenge to the validity of the judgment is not deemed waived by the payment and should be permitted to proceed.
[1] A challenge to the validity of a judgment is not waived by payment when the payment is involuntarily compelled by levy of execution.
[2] A pending challenge to the validity of a judgment should be permitted to proceed when satisfaction of the judgment results from payment compelled under levy of execution.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The majority rule is that if a defendant who has suffered the entry of an adverse money judgment against him voluntarily pays the judgment, the case is moot, but if the payment is involuntary, it does not result in a waiver of the right to appeal.”
Establishes the controlling rule distinguishing between voluntary and involuntary payments and their effect on waiver
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff Claire Whipple obtained a default judgment in a Texas state court against JSZ Financial Company. Whipple registered the judgment in Florida …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Satisfaction Of Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
FARMER, Judge.
After locally registering a .judgment obtained by default in a Texas state court, plaintiff levied execution on an automobile owned by the judgment debtor. The execution took place after the debtor had timely filed a challenge to the validity of the Texas judgment for lack of personal jurisdiction and the challenge was pending. The trial court ultimately dismissed the debtor’s challenge to the judgment on the grounds that the judgment was satisfied after the execution and the ease was therefore moot. We reverse.
It is true that Watson v. Domecki, 436 So. 2d 1036 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983), and Moms North American v. King, 430 So. 2d 592 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983), broadly hold that a satisfaction bars a later attempt to set the judgment aside. The debtor argues that, in this instance however, the rule of Watson and Morris is inapplicable because the payment of the judgment was involuntarily compelled by levy of execution and was thus not voluntary.
As explained by the court in Ronette Communications Corp. v. Lopez, 475 So. 2d 1360, 1360 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985):
“The majority rule is that if a defendant who has suffered the entry of an adverse money judgment against him voluntarily pays the judgment, the case is moot, but if the payment is involuntary, it does not result in a waiver of the right to appeal. ... In the present case, we have no difficulty concluding that appellant ... did not lose its right to appeal when it paid the judgment after execution to avoid a levy on its property.”
See also Slater v. Breakwater Homes Ass’n, 413 So. 2d 148 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982) (no merit in contention that payment of judgment to avoid execution terminated right of appeal). Although the present ease involves continuation of proceedings in the trial court rather than on appeal, we see no rational basis for differentiating between the two. The logic for distinguishing between voluntary and involuntary payment applies in either instance.
We hold that when a satisfaction results from payment compelled under levy of execution, a challenge to the validity of the judgment pending when the coerced payment was made is not deemed waived by the payment and should be permitted to proceed to effect.
REVERSED.
STONE, C.J., and GROSS, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
E. Qualcom Corp. v. Global Commerce Ctr. Ass'n, Inc., 59 So. 3d 347 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)…judgment. We disagree. Where a party pays an adverse money judgment to avoid a forced sale of property, the payment is deemed “involuntary” and the payment does not result in a waiver of the right to appeal the judgment. See Whipple v. JSZ Fin. Co., 717 So. 2d 608, 609 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Ronette Commc’ns Corp. v. Lopez, 475 So. 2d 1360, 1360 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). While this appeal was pending, the trial court granted a satisfaction of judgment. On remand, the trial court must vacate the satisfaction of judg…
-
Whipple v. JSZ Fin. Co., Inc., 885 So. 2d 933 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)…ding that because the judgment was satisfied under the threat of levy of execution, the satisfaction was not voluntary and Whipple did not waive her rights to proceed with her challenge to the validity of the Texas judgment. Whipple v. JSZ Fin. Co., 717 So. 2d 608, 609 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). On remand, following a hearing, the trial court entered final judgment in favor of JSZ, based on the following findings: [T]he Dallas Court had jurisdiction over the Defendant and the Judgment it entered was valid. The Co…
-
Feinstein v. NEW Bethel Missionary Baptist, 938 So. 2d 562 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)…st him voluntarily pays the judgment, the case is moot; but, if the payment is involuntary, it does not result in a waiver of the right to appeal. Ronette Commc’n Corp. v. Lopez, 475 So. 2d 1360 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); see also Whipple v. JSZ Fin. Co., 717 So. 2d 608 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)(ex-ecution upon a Texas judgment registered in Florida did not moot debtor’s challenge to the judgment on ground of lack of personal jurisdiction). Of course, this case involves a plaintiff who has satisfied a judgment. The gener…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Ronette Commc'ns Corp. v. Pasquale Lopez, 475 So. 2d 1360 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)
- Morris N. Am., Inc. v. King, 430 So. 2d 592 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)
- Burgess v. State, 413 So. 2d 148 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)
- Slater v. Breakwater Homes Ass'n, 413 So. 2d 148 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)
- Watson v. Domecki, 436 So. 2d 1036 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)