Reliable Credit Assn., Inc. v. SAFA, Inc.
2019 Ohio 2492
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- Reliable Credit obtained a default judgment against SAFA in Oregon (Clackamas County) for about $8,845 plus interest, costs, and fees in July 2017.
- Reliable domesticated the Oregon judgment in Butler County, Ohio, by filing it under R.C. 2329.022 in October 2017; the Ohio clerk gave SAFA statutory notice.
- Reliable filed a garnishment affidavit naming Fifth Third Bank in December 2017; the garnishment notice informed SAFA that objections at the garnishment hearing could not challenge the underlying judgment.
- SAFA requested and litigated a garnishment hearing in January 2018, participated through counsel, but did not challenge the garnishment ruling or seek a stay.
- The Oregon court later reported the judgment satisfied in April 2018 (garnished funds paid), and the Ohio court entered a satisfaction. Months later SAFA moved to dismiss/vacate the foreign judgment, asserting lack of personal jurisdiction and improper service.
- The trial court denied SAFA’s motion as untimely and because the judgment had been satisfied; the court of appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Reliable's Argument | SAFA's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the domesticated foreign judgment could be collaterally attacked on personal-jurisdiction grounds after satisfaction by garnishment | Judgment was properly domesticated and, once satisfied, the controversy ended; relief would be unavailable so appeal is moot | Judgment is void for lack of personal jurisdiction/service and must be vacated | Appeal moot: satisfaction via garnishment rendered challenge ineffective; denial affirmed |
| Whether SAFA waived its personal-jurisdiction defense by participating in garnishment proceedings and failing to seek a stay | SAFA had notice during garnishment, participated without preserving the jurisdictional defense, and thus waived it | SAFA first learned of the case at garnishment and could not properly litigate jurisdiction earlier | Waiver: SAFA failed to timely and continuously object; defense forfeited |
Key Cases Cited
- Litsinger Sign Co. v. American Sign Co., 11 Ohio St.2d 1 (1967) (foreign judgment subject to collateral attack only for lack of subject-matter or personal jurisdiction)
- Blodgett v. Blodgett, 49 Ohio St.3d 243 (1990) (satisfaction of judgment by voluntary payment renders appeal moot)
- In re Appropriation for Highway Purposes, 169 Ohio St. 314 (1959) (payment accepted as satisfaction ends controversy and extinguishes right to appeal)
- Hagood v. Gail, 105 Ohio App.3d 780 (11th Dist. 1995) (failure to seek a stay before satisfaction is voluntary payment for mootness analysis)