120 So. 3d 853
La. Ct. App.2013Background
- Criminal District Court judgments of bail bond forfeiture were issued against ABIC between 2006 and 2007 in favor of the State.
- In 2009, the State filed a garnishment in Civil District Court seeking to make the judgments executory, and JP Morgan Chase paid approximately $152,863.73 to the sheriff, who paid the State.
- ABIC filed petitions for nullity in Civil District Court and sought injunctive relief in the garnishment action, which was denied since the money had already been disbursed.
- The State filed a declinatory exception for lack of subject matter jurisdiction; ABIC amended its petitions, and in 2011 filed a third amended petition seeking nullity of both the criminal judgments and the garnishments.
- Civil District Court granted the State’s declinatory exception for lack of jurisdiction; ABIC appealed claiming Civil District Court could hear civil nullity actions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Civil District Court have jurisdiction to nullify bond-forfeiture judgments issued by Criminal District Court? | ABIC contends nullity actions are civil and viable in Civil District Court. | State argues Civil District Court has no jurisdiction to review criminal judgments for nullity. | Civil District Court has no jurisdiction over nullity of criminal judgments. |
| Does Civil District Court have jurisdiction over garnishment-related petitions to make judgments executory? | ABIC argues garnishment nullity and related relief fall within Civil District Court. | State contends Civil District Court may issue executory orders for garnishments under the proper statutes. | Civil District Court has subject matter jurisdiction to make executory the garnishment judgments. |
| Should ABIC have sought relief in Criminal District Court rather than Civil District Court for nullity of bond forfeiture judgments? | ABIC maintains the nullity actions are civil and properly brought in Civil District Court. | State and the court hold that nullity of bond forfeiture judgments is a matter for the Criminal District Court, not Civil. | ABIC should have raised its nullity in Criminal District Court; Civil District Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over those judgments. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. McCreary, 619 So.2d 755 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1993) (absolute nullity varies by service and jurisdiction)
- Maryland Nat’l Ins. Co. v. Garrison, 233 So.2d 32 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1970) (Civil District Court cannot enjoin Criminal District Court)
- Connick v. Ward, 351 So.2d 250 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1977) (Civil District Court lacks authority to review acts of Criminal District Court)
- United Ben. Fire Ins. Co. of Omaha, Neb. v. Garrison, 166 So.2d 650 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1964) (no supervisory or appellate jurisdiction between Civil and Criminal Courts)
- State v. Likens, 577 So.2d 285 (La.App. 3d Cir. 1991) (nullity theories under La. C.C.P. Art. 2002–2004)
- Dawson v. Gosserand, 552 So.2d 1380 (La.App. 5th Cir. 1989) (absolute nullity may be brought in any court; relative nullity in rendering court)