 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Buckley v. Personnel Support Systems2/11/2003
ebtor may appear and offer proof that an appeal is pending or that enforcement is, or ought to be, otherwise stayed. Miss. Code Ann. §§ 11-7-303 to -307 (Supp. 2002).
. This statutory procedure, with its built-in safeguards for the judgment debtor, must be followed before the "clerk shall treat the foreign judgment in the same manner as a judgment of the circuit court . . . ." Miss. Code Ann. § 11-7-303 (Supp. 2002). The procedure provides a vehicle by which a judgment creditor may, if the creditor so desires, obtain the issuance of a garnishment or other execution, returnable - not to the court where the judgment was obtained as required by Section 13-3-155- but to the circuit court of the county where the foreign judgment has been filed. The detailed prerequisites of the statute, however, are necessary forerunners of the court's authority and not mere ministerial acts that may be accomplished after-the-fact or become the subject of waiver.
. In this case, the most authority even arguably afforded to the Circuit Clerk of Jones County, was to issue a garnishment returnable to the court in which the judgment was obtained, i.e., the federal district court. Even that authority appears, at best, highly doubtful in view of the comments this Court made at the conclusion of our decision in Estelle v. Robinson concerning efforts in the circuit court to collect an unenrolled bankruptcy court judgment. Estelle v. Robinson, 805 So. 2d 623, 626 ( 12) (Miss. Ct. App. 2002). The clerk, in the case before us, issued the writ returnable to the Circuit Court of Jones County, an act not authorized by statute until the requirements of the previously- cited uniform act were met. The writ, therefore, conferred no authority on the Circuit Court of Jones County to entertain any proceedings to determine matters relating to the writ. The Jones County Circuit Court ultimately dismissed the writ based on certain perceived failures in the method of process employed to summons Personnel, the garnishee, and on Buckley's failure to have the judgment enrolled under Section 11-7-197.
We have determined that the court was without jurisdiction to proceed because of fundamental errors that would have remained even if a judgment abstract had been enrolled under Section 11-7-197 and the writ properly served on an authorized agent of Personnel. However, it is a long-standing practice of appellate courts to affirm the action of the lower court when the appellate court determines that the right result has been reached, even though for the wrong reason. Tedford v. Dempsey, 437 So.2d 410, 418 (Miss.1983). It is on that basis that we affirm the action of the trial court in dismissing the writ on jurisdictional considerations, even though we differ as to the particular reasoning that compels the result we reach today.
. THE ORDER OF DISMISSAL OF WRIT OF GARNISHMENT OF THE JONES COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT IS AFFIRMED. COSTS OF THIS APPEAL ARE ASSESSED TO THE APPELLANT.
KING AND SOUTHWICK, P.JJ., BRIDGES, THOMAS, LEE, IRVING, MYERS, CHANDLER AND GRIFFIS, JJ., CONCUR.
|