Quality Diesel Service, Inc. v. Tiger Drilling Company, LLC
190 So. 3d 860
| Miss. | 2016Background
- Quality Diesel obtained a judgment against Gulf South on January 5, 2004.
- Quality Diesel learned Tiger Drilling owed Gulf South $1,717,390.21 and had writs of garnishment issued and served on Tiger Drilling between June 2004 and October 2006.
- Tiger Drilling answered each writ saying it owed Gulf South but the debt was not yet due.
- Quality Diesel filed a Petition to Controvert Tiger Drilling’s answer on November 29, 2006 (within seven years of the judgment).
- The underlying Mississippi judgment was not renewed and lapsed after seven years; Tiger Drilling moved to dismiss the garnishment in 2014, and the trial court dismissed, ruling the lapsed judgment invalidated the garnishment.
- The Mississippi Supreme Court reversed, holding timely-issued writs and a timely-filed garnishment action preserve rights to property that was in the garnishee’s hands when the writ was served.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a garnisher must renew the underlying judgment to collect property in the garnishee’s hands when the writ and garnishment action were timely executed and filed | Quality Diesel: No renewal required when writs and Petition to Controvert were filed within seven years; lien covers property in the garnishee’s hands at time of service | Tiger Drilling: Under prior precedent, a valid (non-lapsed) judgment is essential to maintain garnishment; lapsed judgment defeats garnishment | Court: No renewal required; timely writs and timely garnishment action toll the limitations as to property actually in garnishee’s hands at time of service when judgment was valid |
Key Cases Cited
- Tucker v. Hinds Cty., 558 So.2d 869 (Miss. 1990) (standard for reviewing motions to dismiss and taking allegations as true)
- City of Belmont v. Mississippi State Tax Comm’n, 860 So.2d 289 (Miss. 2003) (de novo review of legal questions)
- McFadden v. State, 542 So.2d 871 (Miss. 1989) (standard for civil pleadings and motions to dismiss)
- Grace v. Pierce, 90 So. 590 (Miss. 1922) (statement that a valid judgment is essential to garnishment proceedings)
- Anderson-Tully Co. v. Brown, 383 So.2d 1389 (Miss. 1980) (garnisher cannot collect property acquired by garnishee after the underlying judgment lapsed)