200 A.3d 507
Pa. Super. Ct.2018Background
- Eclipse Liquidity, Inc. filed a praecipe in Philadelphia to enter a UK money judgment for USD $3,447,519.91, citing the Uniform Foreign Money Judgment Recognition Act (Recognition Act).
- No separate complaint was filed; Pa.R.C.P. 236 notice was served with the praecipe.
- Geden Holdings filed a petition to strike, arguing the Recognition Act requires commencing a civil action for recognition (not mere praecipe entry) and that due process required notice/hearing before recognition.
- The trial court denied the petition to strike; Geden appealed, raising whether a foreign judgment may be recognized via ex parte praecipe.
- The Superior Court reviewed statutory text and precedent, focusing on the Recognition Act and the Enforcement Act (registration/domestication procedures) and affirmed the trial court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Eclipse) | Defendant's Argument (Geden) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a foreign-country money judgment may be domesticated/ enforced in Pennsylvania by filing a praecipe citing the Recognition Act | Praecipe plus attachment and Rule 236 notice suffices to domesticate and enforce the UK judgment under the Recognition Act; no prior separate recognition action required | Recognition must be judicially determined before enforcement; praecipe without a complaint denied due process and is procedurally insufficient | A praecipe invoking the Recognition Act and attaching the foreign judgment, with Rule 236 notice, was sufficient to domesticate/enforce; defendant may later attack the judgment under Recognition Act grounds via petition to strike/open |
Key Cases Cited
- Morrissey v. Morrissey, 713 A.2d 614 (Pa. 1998) (registration as a streamlined alternative to commencing a civil action to domesticate foreign judgments)
- Hilkmann v. Hilkmann, 858 A.2d 58 (Pa. 2004) (Recognition Act provides registration alternative to civil action for foreign-country judgments)
- Louis Dreyfus Commodities Suisse SA v. Fin. Software Sys., Inc., 99 A.3d 79 (Pa. Super. 2014) (praecipe citing wrong statutory scheme—Enforcement Act—was fatally flawed)
- Society of Lloyd’s v. Ashenden, 233 F.3d 473 (7th Cir. 2000) (English courts provide procedures compatible with due process; comity supports recognition)
- Green Acres Rehab. & Nursing Ctr. v. Sullivan, 113 A.3d 1261 (Pa. Super. 2015) (petition to strike available only for defects apparent on face of record)
- Olympus Corp. v. Canady, 962 A.2d 671 (Pa. Super. 2008) (standard of review for petitions to strike judgments)