Orne v. Shinn, et al.

2002 DNH 144

• Court: District Court, D. New Hampshire
• Decided: July 26, 2002
• Docket: CV-02-336-M
• Status: Published

Opinion

Orne v . Shinn, et a l . CV-02-336-M 07/26/02 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Frank W . Orne, Jr., Plaintiff

v. Civil N o . 02-336-M Opinion N o . 2002 DNH 144 Edward C . Shinn, Jr.; and Edward C . Shinn, Jr., as Trustee of Nutting Rd. Farm Realty Trust, Defendants

O R D E R

The precise nature of this suit is somewhat difficult to

discern, as plaintiff cites both New Hampshire’s pre-judgment

attachment statute (N.H. R E V . STAT. A N N . (“RSA”) c h . 511-A) and the

state’s Revised Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act ( R S A

ch. 524-A) in the memorandum in support of his motion for real

estate attachment, which is currently before the court. However,

based upon ¶¶ 4 and 5 of his verified complaint, it would appear

that plaintiff seeks to register his judgment from the Essex

County (Massachusetts) Superior Court for enforcement by this

court. The court notes, in particular, plaintiff’s claim that

“this court maintains jurisdiction to enforce a judgment granted

to Plaintiff, by virtue of Article 4 of the United States Constitution which provides that full faith and credit shall be

given [by] each state to the judicial proceedings of other

states.” (Compl. ¶ 5.)

Plaintiff’s reliance upon the federal Constitution is

misplaced, and his case must be dismissed, because this court

lacks subject matter jurisdiction to enforce plaintiff’s

Massachusetts judgment. “State court judgments cannot be

registered in this [c]ourt.” Atkinson v . Kestell, 954 F. Supp.

1 4 , 15 n.2 (D.D.C. 1997), aff’d sub nom. Atkinson v . Inter-

American Dev. Bank, 156 F.3d 1335 (D.C. Cir. 1998) (citing 28

U.S.C. § 1963 (enumerating the judgments that may be registered

in a United States district court); Fox Painting C o . v . NLRB, 16

F.3d 115, 117 (6th Cir. 1994)). As the United States District

Court for the Western District of Virginia has explained:

Registration of judgments is permitted by statute. 28 U.S.C. § 1963. Unfortunately for the petitioner [who attempted to register a Virginia state court judgment in a federal district court in Virginia], the only judgments that can be registered under that statute are judgments from other courts of the United States. . . .

It is clearly established that this court is to give the judgments and orders of a state court full faith and credit. However, giving a state’s judgment

2 full faith and credit, that i s , preclusive effect in any proceeding before the court, is a far cry from making a judgment of a state court a federal judgment, which is what registration is all about. . . .

It is the view of this court that though a procedure like the one proposed by petitioner in this case ought to exist, it does not now exist. Congress has not seen fit to grant the courts of the United States authority to do what petitioner asks, and neither statutory nor constitutional full faith and credit affords a substitute for such authority.

W.S. Frey C o . v . Precipitation Assocs. of Am., Inc., 899 F. Supp.

1527, 1528-29 (W.D. Va. 1995) (citations omitted).

Because this court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to

enforce a judgment entered by the Essex County (Massachusetts)

Superior Court, plaintiff’s suit is dismissed, sua sponte. See

Atkinson, 954 F. Supp. at 1 5 .

SO ORDERED.

Steven J. McAuliffe United States District Judge

July 2 6 , 2002

cc: John A . Doonan, Esq. John F. Gallant, Esq.