Canon Financial Services, Inc. v. National Voting Rights Museum & Institute, Inc.

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

REL: 9/10/2010 Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o formal r e v i s i o n b e f o r e p u b l i c a t i o n i n t h e advance s h e e t s o f Southern R e p o r t e r . R e a d e r s a r e r e q u e s t e d t o n o t i f y t h e R e p o r t e r o f D e c i s i o n s , Alabama A p p e l l a t e C o u r t s , 300 D e x t e r A v e n u e , M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a 3 6 1 0 4 - 3 7 4 1 ((334) 2 2 9 - 0 6 4 9 ) , o f a n y t y p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r e r r o r s , i n o r d e r t h a t c o r r e c t i o n s may b e made b e f o r e t h e o p i n i o n i s p r i n t e d i n Southern R e p o r t e r . ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS SPECIAL TERM, 2010 2080962 Canon F i n a n c i a l S e r v i c e s , Inc. v. N a t i o n a l V o t i n g Rights Museum & I n s t i t u t e , Inc. Appeal from D a l l a s C i r c u i t Court (CV-07-173) PITTMAN, J u d g e . Canon F i n a n c i a l S e r v i c e s , I n c . order of the Dallas Circuit ("Canon"), a p p e a l s Court ("the A l a b a m a f r o m an court") g r a n t i n g a m o t i o n f i l e d b y t h e N a t i o n a l V o t i n g R i g h t s Museum & Institute, I n c . ("NVRMI"), s e e k i n g relief from a judgment 2080962 entered by the Alabama court in response to Canon's r e g i s t r a t i o n o f a f o r e i g n j u d g m e n t e n t e r e d i n Canon's f a v o r b y the Superior County Court ("the New o f New Jersey Law Division, Burlington J e r s e y c o u r t " ) , i n an a c t i o n t h a t h a d b e e n b r o u g h t b y Canon a g a i n s t NVRMI i n t h a t s t a t e . remand w i t h instructions. In 2007, We r e v e r s e and August document which l a b e l e d "Notice i t sought Enforcement 1975, Canon § of F i l i n g invoke of Foreign 6-9-230 affidavit to the e t seq. Jersey Museum" f o r $43,522.92 amended i n May defendant; entered included January the Uniform ("UEFJA"), A l a . Code to that filing was an a c c o u n t manager i n w h i c h she against plus as "National costs; that to name E x h i b i t s t o the a f f i d a v i t notice pertinent so a Judgment" i n of certified Voting NVRMI as filed 2 was proper i n support photocopies t h e May the enforceable, 2007 j u d g m e n t , w h i c h r e f l e c t s as a d e f a u l t j u d g m e n t , a n d Rights the judgment and t h a t t h e j u d g m e n t was v a l i d , unsatisfied. Canon's Attached court 2007 Canon h a d o b t a i n e d a j u d g m e n t court 2007 of Foreign provisions o f Canon's l i t i g a t i o n New i n t h e Alabama Judgments A c t t e s t i f i e d t h a t i n January in filed of both and of the t h a t i t was 2007 amendment 2080962 thereto. Canon's notice also contained a certificate s e r v i c e i n d i c a t i n g t h a t a c o p y o f t h e n o t i c e h a d been to the l a s t litigation the address a c c o u n t manager's Alabama declaring known court that enforceable entered t h e New f o r NVRMI as s e t f o r t h affidavit. mailed i n the On A u g u s t 2 1 , 2007, a judgment Jersey of i n favor judgment would o f Canon be deemed i n Alabama. I n O c t o b e r 2007, NVRMI, p u r s u a n t t o R u l e 6 0 ( b ) ( 4 ) , A l a . R. C i v . P., f i l e d a m o t i o n f o r r e l i e f from t h e Alabama court's r e g i s t r a t i o n j u d g m e n t , a v e r r i n g t h a t NVRMI h a d n o t b e e n "made aware" of the lawsuit court's j u d g m e n t a n d t h a t NVRMI h a d no f a m i l i a r i t y o f h a v i n g obtained i n t h e New Jersey court or of that a c o p y i n g m a c h i n e f r o m a n y o f Canon's a f f i l i a t e s . s u p p o r t o f i t s m o t i o n , NVRMI f i l e d an a f f i d a v i t g i v e n longtime r e g i s t e r e d agent f o r s e r v i c e of process, In by i t s i n w h i c h she t e s t i f i e d t h a t s h e h a d n e v e r been s e r v e d w i t h a n y p a p e r s as t o the a c t i o n i n t h e New J e r s e y served Alabama with process court. court and t h a t she had n o t been i n the r e g i s t r a t i o n proceeding The p a r t i e s then filed briefs i n the as t o t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e p o s i t i o n s , w i t h Canon a s s e r t i n g t h a t t h e New J e r s e y c o u r t h a d h a d p e r s o n a l j u r i s d i c t i o n o v e r NVRMI p u r s u a n t t o t h e 3 2080962 l a w s o f t h a t s t a t e a n d t h a t t h a t c o u r t ' s j u d g m e n t was e n t i t l e d to full f a i t h a n d c r e d i t i n A l a b a m a a n d NVRMI a s s e r t i n g t h a t Canon h a d f a i l e d t o d e m o n s t r a t e e f f e c t i v e s e r v i c e upon one o f its d i r e c t o r s (a method t h a t NVRMI a d m i t t e d u n d e r New J e r s e y l a w ) . further admissible positions, of a document entered into i n support of t h e i r respective Canon d i d s u b m i t an u n a u t h e n t i c a t e d purporting by NVRMI's m o t i o n N e i t h e r Canon n o r NVRMI s u b m i t t e d any evidence although m i g h t be p r o p e r t o be the parties. forrelief an o f f i c e - e q u i p m e n t The A l a b a m a court from t h e r e g i s t r a t i o n lease granted j u d g m e n t on June 3, 2009, o p i n i n g t h a t " s e r v i c e i n t h e u n d e r l y i n g was not e f f e c t i v e pursuant t o t h e Alabama copy Rules of action Civil Procedure" (emphasis added). Canon t i m e l y a p p e a l e d t o t h i s court that upon from controversy; brief 1 the appeal because appellate order NVRMI based the l i m i t e d has been s u b m i t t e d has n o t f a v o r e d amount in s o l e l y on Canon's this court with an brief. Our r e v i e w i s governed by t h e f o l l o w i n g p r i n c i p l e s : A s we h e l d i n N i x v . C a s s i d y , 899 So. 2d 998, 999-1000 ( A l a . C i v . App. 2 0 0 4 ) , s u c h an o r d e r i s f i n a l , a n d an a p p e a l may p r o p e r l y be t a k e n therefrom. 1 4 2080962 "The r e v i e w a p p l i c a b l e t o a R u l e 6 0 ( b ) ( 4 ) m o t i o n i s de novo. When t h e g r a n t o r d e n i a l o f r e l i e f t u r n s on t h e v a l i d i t y o f t h e j u d g m e n t , as u n d e r R u l e 60(b)(4), discretion has no place. The only q u e s t i o n b e f o r e us i s w h e t h e r t h e j u d g m e n t i s v o i d . A judgment i s v o i d o n l y i f the c o u r t r e n d e r i n g i t l a c k e d j u r i s d i c t i o n over the s u b j e c t matter or over t h e p a r t i e s , o r i f i t a c t e d i n a manner i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h due p r o c e s s . "The C o n s t i t u t i o n o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s , A r t i c l e I V , S e c t i o n 1, r e q u i r e s t h a t ' f u l l f a i t h and c r e d i t s h a l l be g i v e n i n e a c h s t a t e t o t h e p u b l i c a c t s , r e c o r d s and j u d i c i a l p r o c e e d i n g s o f e v e r y o t h e r s t a t e . ' A j u d g m e n t , t h e r e f o r e , e n t e r e d by t h e c o u r t of another state having j u r i s d i c t i o n over the s u b j e c t m a t t e r and p e r s o n s i s e n t i t l e d t o f u l l f a i t h and c r e d i t i n A l a b a m a c o u r t s . "The v a l i d i t y and e f f e c t o f a f o r e i g n j u d g m e n t a r e d e t e r m i n e d by t h e l a w o f t h e s t a t e i n w h i c h i t was r e n d e r e d . I f a judgment of a s i s t e r s t a t e i s p r o p e r l y a u t h e n t i c a t e d and f i l e d w i t h t h e c i r c u i t court, [as p r o v i d e d f o r i n t h e UEFJA, A l a . Code 1975,] §§ 6-9-232, 6-9-233, a p r e s u m p t i o n arises that the court rendering that judgment had jurisdiction t o do so. Therefore, the p a r t y c h a l l e n g i n g t h e j u d g m e n t has t h e b u r d e n o f a s s e r t i n g l a c k of j u r i s d i c t i o n and p r o d u c i n g e v i d e n c e to overcome t h e p r e s u m p t i o n . " G r e e n e v. C o n n e l l y , 628 So. 2d 346, added; c i t a t i o n s omitted). 351 ( A l a . 1993) (emphasis 2 To t h e e x t e n t t h a t G r e e n e h e l d t h a t a m o t i o n filed p u r s u a n t t o R u l e 6 0 ( b ) ( 4 ) must be f i l e d w i t h i n a r e a s o n a b l e time, i t has been abrogated by Ex parte F u l l Circle Distribution, L.L.C., 883 So. 2d 638 ( A l a . 2 0 0 3 ) ; h o w e v e r , G r e e n e o t h e r w i s e r e m a i n s b i n d i n g p r e c e d e n t upon t h i s c o u r t . 2 5 2080962 From Alabama the foregoing, court's process i t i s readily views concerning the e f f i c a c y i n the underlying immaterial action under v a l i d i t y o f t h e New J e r s e y that stands that the of s e r v i c e of Alabama law are t o w h e t h e r f u l l f a i t h a n d c r e d i t s h o u l d be e x t e n d e d t o t h e j u d g m e n t o f t h e New J e r s e y c o u r t . law apparent Greene d i r e c t s for the court's j u d g m e n t u n d e r New a reviewing proposition Rather, i t i s t o the court. Greene NVRMI, that as Jersey further the party c h a l l e n g i n g t h e New J e r s e y c o u r t ' s j u d g m e n t , h a d t h e b u r d e n o f demonstrating jurisdiction on the that that court or personal judgment jurisdiction, lacked either j u r i s d i c t i o n ; b e c a u s e NVRMI's a t t a c k impugned only that court's the single pertinent question w h e t h e r NVRMI met i t s b u r d e n o f p r o v i n g court's subject-matter personal i n this that case i s t h e New Jersey j u d g m e n t was n o t v a l i d u n d e r t h a t s t a t e ' s l a w on t h a t basis. The r e c o r d its action civil indicates that i n t h e New procedure in personam corporation ina civil initiated court, Jersey provided obtaining i n 2006, when Canon rules of that the jurisdiction that state's "primary over a c t i o n was "by c a u s i n g 6 method" a of defendant t h e summons a n d 2080962 complaint t o be p e r s o n a l l y served w i t h i n " New Jersey "any o f f i c e r , d i r e c t o r , t r u s t e e o r m a n a g i n g o r g e n e r a l of the c o r p o r a t i o n , or by corporation service of process i n charge t h e r e o f , " e f f e c t e d upon t h o s e p e r s o n s ) thereof" Jersey] agent" or ( i fservice could of the of the n o t be (4) "a p e r s o n a t t h e p r i n c i p a l o f t h e c o r p o r a t i o n i n [New J e r s e y ] i n charge o r (5) "any e m p l o y e e o f t h e c o r p o r a t i o n w i t h i n a c t i n g i n the discharge corporation h a d no New 4 ( a ) , N.J.R. C i v . P. of b u s i n e s s Jersey place personal "that service of business. Rule 4:4- NVRMI a p p e a r s n o t t o h a v e h a d any p l a c e o r e m p l o y e e s i n New affidavit [New of h i s or her d u t i e s " i f the Jersey. court rules also expressly provided by on b e h a l f (3) "a p e r s o n a t t h e r e g i s t e r e d o f f i c e p l a c e of business (1) (2) "any p e r s o n a u t h o r i z e d b y a p p o i n t m e n t law t o r e c e i v e corporation," on despite However, New t h a t i f i t c o u l d be shown diligent effort and [ c o u l d n o t ] be made" c o n s i s t e n t inquiry with 4:4-4(a), i n personam j u r i s d i c t i o n c o u l d be o b t a i n e d corporate defendant means: by two other Jersey s e r v i c e i n a s t a t e of the U n i t e d States (a) b y Rule over a "personal ... i n t h e same manner as i f s e r v i c e were made w i t h i n [New J e r s e y ] " o r b y "a p u b l i c official serve having authority to 7 civil process i n the 2080962 jurisdiction qualified i n which the s e r v i c e to jurisdiction practice law [was] made o r b y a p e r s o n in i n which s e r v i c e [New Jersey] or i n the [was] made"; o r (b) b y " m a i l i n g a c o p y o f t h e summons a n d c o m p l a i n t b y r e g i s t e r e d o r c e r t i f i e d mail, return ordinary mail registered receipt requested, t o ... agent and, [the] corporation f o r service, ... a d d r e s s e d by to a or t o i t s p r i n c i p a l place of business, or t o i t s registered o f f i c e . " and simultaneously, 4 : 4 - 4 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) , N.J.R. C i v . P. Rules 4:4-4(b)(1)(A) F i n a l l y , New J e r s e y l a w a t t h e t i m e o f t h e i n s t i t u t i o n o f Canon's a c t i o n p r o v i d e d t h a t i f service could authorized by n o t be affected order." Rule The foregoing authority service NVRMI modes b y r u l e , a n y d e f e n d a n t c o u l d be s e r v e d "as p r o v i d e d court law, b y any o f t h e o t h e r could, 4:4-4(b)(3). of process under i n d i c a t e s t h a t , u n d e r New J e r s e y upon a f o r e i g n the right corporation s e t of factual s u c h as and legal c i r c u m s t a n c e s , be a c c o m p l i s h e d b y a number o f d i f f e r e n t , b u t equally summons e f f e c t i v e , means, s u c h as b y p e r s o n a l d e l i v e r y o f t h e and c o m p l a i n t i n the action o r by m a i l i n g those documents t o e i t h e r a " p e r s o n a u t h o r i z e d by appointment o r by law on to receive service of 8 process behalf of the 2080962 corporation," by affidavit, s u c h as NVRMI's r e g i s t e r e d a g e n t who or to "any director, managing or general evidence a d d u c e d b y NVRMI was t h e t e s t i m o n y affidavit that falls o f NVRMI. she h a d n o t "been s e r v e d process regarding" evidence agent" officer, of negating trustee However, the with of i t s d i r e c t o r s (as Canon court. b r i e f but d i d not prove), 3 That the p o s s i b i l i t i e s alleged sole any p a p e r s o r Canon p r o p e r l y s e r v e d NVRMI w i t h p r o c e s s b y p e r s o n a l l y one or i n the agent's t h e a c t i o n i n t h e New J e r s e y f a r short testified in its that serving trial-court b y s e r v i n g NVRMI b y c e r t i f i e d a n d r e g u l a r m a i l a d d r e s s e d t o NVRMI's " r e g u l a r p l a c e o f b u s i n e s s " in Selma, or by effecting service i n some other fashion We n o t e t h a t Canon h a s a t t a c h e d , as an e x h i b i t t o i t s brief on a p p e a l , an " e x h i b i t " that purports t o be an " a f f i d a v i t of s e r v i c e " executed by a " s h e r i f f ' s o f f i c e r " i n which i t i s a s s e r t e d t h a t t h e s i g n i n g o f f i c e r had p e r s o n a l l y s e r v e d an a g e n t o r a p e r s o n i n c h a r g e o f t h e o f f i c e o f t h e " N a t i o n a l V o t i n g R i g h t s Museum." As Canon f r e e l y a d m i t s i n i t s a p p e l l a t e b r i e f , t h a t document was n o t s u b m i t t e d t o t h e Alabama c o u r t f o r i t s c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h i t s d e c i s i o n s t o a l l o w t h e New J e r s e y c o u r t ' s j u d g m e n t t o be r e g i s t e r e d o r t o g r a n t NVRMI's m o t i o n f o r r e l i e f . We r e g r e t t h e n e e d t o a g a i n r e m i n d t h e B a r t h a t an a p p e l l a t e r e c o r d c a n n o t be s u p p l e m e n t e d o r e n l a r g e d b y t h e mere a t t a c h m e n t o f documents t o an a p p e l l a n t ' s b r i e f , s e e C u r v i n v. C u r v i n , 6 So. 3d 1165, 1173 ( A l a . C i v . App. 2 0 0 8 ) , a n d we e x p r e s s l y d i s a v o w any r e l i a n c e upon Canon's " e x h i b i t " i n r e a c h i n g o u r d e c i s i o n today. 3 9 2080962 authorized by t h e New Jersey court. As G r e e n e n o t e s , under f u l l - f a i t h - a n d - c r e d i t p r i n c i p l e s , i t was NVRMI's b u r d e n i n t h e A l a b a m a c o u r t t o p r o v e t h e a b s e n c e o f j u r i s d i c t i o n i n t h e New Jersey that court, n o t Canon's burden to prove the e x i s t e n c e j u r i s d i c t i o n , and NVRMI f a i l e d t o c a r r y negating of i t s burden by e a c h o f t h e p o t e n t i a l b a s e s by w h i c h t h e i n p e r s o n a m jurisdiction of t h e New Jersey court could lawfully have attached. Because demonstrated that foreign unsatisfied Canon judgment a g a i n s t i t had required domesticated generally debtor, under the t h e UEFJA, judgment A l a . Code 1975, the of § the valid NVRMI and t h a t p r o p e r l y n o t i f i e d NVRMI o f t h e r e g i s t r a t i o n as a 6-9-233. i t had of that judgment court properly Alabama New and Jersey court. NVRMI, the See judgment f a i l e d t o a d d u c e s u f f i c i e n t e v i d e n c e t o overcome t h e prevailing presumption court validly was entering 60(b)(4) i t s June motion. that entered, 3, t h e judgment and 2009, That order 2007, r e g i s t r a t i o n t h e Alabama order granting i s reversed, remanded f o r t h e e n t r y o f a o r d e r judgment. 10 o f t h e New court Jersey erred i n NVRMI's Rule and t h e c a u s e i s reinstating t h e A u g u s t 21, 2080962 REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS. Thompson, P . J . , and Bryan, concur. 11 Thomas, a n d Moore, J J . ,

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.