6584 Precedential Processed

Lawyers Title Services, Inc. v. Boyle

Louisiana Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit · Filed February 13, 1975 · 308 So. 2d 479

Also decided on this docket: La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., September 7, 1978 362 So. 2d 1177; La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., November 16, 1965 189 So. 2d 304; La., April 15, 1877 29 La. Ann. 257

Cited by

De Francesch v. R. PETERSON AND ASSOCIATES INS. 508 So. 2d 1014 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1987
Shaw v. Ferguson 437 So. 2d 319 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1983
Bridgewater v. Worthy 420 So. 2d 1171 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1982
Barnes v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. 399 So. 2d 1318 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1981
Marshall v. Marshall 390 So. 2d 1365 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1980
Broday v. Broday 360 So. 2d 645 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1978

Opinion text

308 So.2d 479 (1975) LAWYERS TITLE SERVICES, INC., a Florida Corporation v. Richard C. BOYLE. No. 6584. Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit. February 13, 1975. *480 Jerald L. Album, Mmahat, Gagliano, Duffy & Giordano, Metairie, for plaintiff-appellee. Gordon K. Konrad, Gretna, for defendant-appellant. Before REDMANN, BOUTALL and BEER, JJ. REDMANN, Judge. Defendant appeals from a 1974 summary judgment making executory in Louisiana a 1961 Florida money judgment. The Florida judgment is enforceable in Florida for 20 years; Fla.Stat.Ann. § 95.11(1). Defendant pleads on appeal, for the first time, that the judgment is not enforceable in Louisiana after ten years; La.C.C. art. 3547. The trial court's judgment was correct in obeying La.C.C.P. art. 927 and not supplying the unpleaded objection of prescription. Nevertheless, now that defendant is represented by counsel and has pleaded prescription on appeal as C.C.P. art. 2163 authorizes, we apply the Louisiana statute and sustain that plea despite the Full Faith and Credit clause, U.S. Const. art. 4 § 1. Watkins v. Conway, 1966, 385 U.S. 188 , 87 S.Ct. 357 , 17 L.Ed. 2d 286 . C.C.P. art. 2163 would ordinarily entitle plaintiff to a remand for "trial" of an exception of prescription. Here, however, there is no issue of fact to be tried. Plaintiff asks remand "for a determination as to whether or not there was a revival of the judgment in Florida." If there has been or is hereafter a new judgment based on the 1961 judgment a new suit can be brought on the new judgment; Watkins, supra . Reversed; suit dismissed.