faith and credit clause in Alabama

2005Durfee v. Duke , 375 U.S. 106 , 84 S.Ct. 242 , 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963).

2005Durfee v. Duke , 375 U.S. 106 , 84 S.Ct. 242 , 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963).

1996Alston Electric Supply Co. v. Alabama Electrical Wholesalers, Inc., 586 So.2d 10 (Ala. Civ.App.1991)....

1993Alston Electric Supply Co. v. Alabama Electrical Wholesalers, Inc. , 586 So.2d 10 (Ala.Civ.App. 1991).

1994In 1980, Congress enacted the PKPA to establish national standards to be applied in interstate custody disputes to determine which state court should exercise jurisdiction and to determine the effect to be given child custody determinations by state courts of other jurisdictions. 3 In Thompson v. Thompson, 484 U.S. 174 , 108 S.Ct. 513 , 98 L.Ed.2d 512 (1988), the United States Supreme Court summarized the circumstances prompting the enactment of the PKPA and the purposes it was designed to achieve: “At the time Congress passed the PKPA, custody orders held a peculiar status under the full fait

1994In 1980, Congress enacted the PKPA to establish national standards to be applied in interstate custody disputes to determine which state court should exercise jurisdiction and to determine the effect to be given child custody determinations by state courts of other jurisdictions. 3 In Thompson v. Thompson, 484 U.S. 174 , 108 S.Ct. 513 , 98 L.Ed.2d 512 (1988), the United States Supreme Court summarized the circumstances prompting the enactment of the PKPA and the purposes it was designed to achieve: “At the time Congress passed the PKPA, custody orders held a peculiar status under the full fait

1970If final, it is protected by the full faith and credit clause of the Federal Constitution and is enforceable in another state. * * * ( 239 Ala. at page 408 , 195 So. at page 550 ) * * * * * * “ ‘Where, by the law of the state where rendered, the decree is not subject to modification at the discretion of the court as to installments which are already due, then the judgment as to such installments is final and must be given full faith and credit in another state. * * * ” ( 239 Ala. at page 409 , 195 So. at page 550 ) The Missouri law as to past due alimony installments was stated by the St.

1970If final, it is protected by the full faith and credit clause of the Federal Constitution and is enforceable in another state. * * * ( 239 Ala. at page 408 , 195 So. at page 550 ) * * * * * * “ ‘Where, by the law of the state where rendered, the decree is not subject to modification at the discretion of the court as to installments which are already due, then the judgment as to such installments is final and must be given full faith and credit in another state. * * * ” ( 239 Ala. at page 409 , 195 So. at page 550 ) The Missouri law as to past due alimony installments was stated by the St.

1948Ex parte Jones, 249 Ala. 386 , 31 So.2d 314 ; Davis v. Davis, 305 U.S. 32, 41 , 59 S.Ct. 3 , 83 L.Ed. 26, 30 , 118 A.L.R. 1518 ; Keller v. Keller, 352 Mo. 877 , 179 S.W.2d 728 ; Pratt v. Midema, 311 Mich. 64 , 18 N.W.2d 279 ; Finan v. Finan, Sup., 47 N.Y.S.2d 429 ; Glaser v. Glaser, 276 N.Y. 296 , 12 N.E.2d 305 ; Standish v. Standish, 179 Misc. 564 , 40 N.Y.S.2d 538 ; Stone v. Stone, Dom.Rel.Ct., 44 N.Y.S.2d 558 .

1948Ex parte Jones, 249 Ala. 386 , 31 So.2d 314 ; Davis v. Davis, 305 U.S. 32, 41 , 59 S.Ct. 3 , 83 L.Ed. 26, 30 , 118 A.L.R. 1518 ; Keller v. Keller, 352 Mo. 877 , 179 S.W.2d 728 ; Pratt v. Midema, 311 Mich. 64 , 18 N.W.2d 279 ; Finan v. Finan, Sup., 47 N.Y.S.2d 429 ; Glaser v. Glaser, 276 N.Y. 296 , 12 N.E.2d 305 ; Standish v. Standish, 179 Misc. 564 , 40 N.Y.S.2d 538 ; Stone v. Stone, Dom.Rel.Ct., 44 N.Y.S.2d 558 .

1948Ex parte Jones, 249 Ala. 386 , 31 So.2d 314 ; Davis v. Davis, 305 U.S. 32, 41 , 59 S.Ct. 3 , 83 L.Ed. 26, 30 , 118 A.L.R. 1518 ; Keller v. Keller, 352 Mo. 877 , 179 S.W.2d 728 ; Pratt v. Midema, 311 Mich. 64 , 18 N.W.2d 279 ; Finan v. Finan, Sup., 47 N.Y.S.2d 429 ; Glaser v. Glaser, 276 N.Y. 296 , 12 N.E.2d 305 ; Standish v. Standish, 179 Misc. 564 , 40 N.Y.S.2d 538 ; Stone v. Stone, Dom.Rel.Ct., 44 N.Y.S.2d 558 .

1948Ex parte Jones, 249 Ala. 386 , 31 So.2d 314 ; Davis v. Davis, 305 U.S. 32, 41 , 59 S.Ct. 3 , 83 L.Ed. 26, 30 , 118 A.L.R. 1518 ; Keller v. Keller, 352 Mo. 877 , 179 S.W.2d 728 ; Pratt v. Midema, 311 Mich. 64 , 18 N.W.2d 279 ; Finan v. Finan, Sup., 47 N.Y.S.2d 429 ; Glaser v. Glaser, 276 N.Y. 296 , 12 N.E.2d 305 ; Standish v. Standish, 179 Misc. 564 , 40 N.Y.S.2d 538 ; Stone v. Stone, Dom.Rel.Ct., 44 N.Y.S.2d 558 .

1948Ex parte Jones, 249 Ala. 386 , 31 So.2d 314 ; Davis v. Davis, 305 U.S. 32, 41 , 59 S.Ct. 3 , 83 L.Ed. 26, 30 , 118 A.L.R. 1518 ; Keller v. Keller, 352 Mo. 877 , 179 S.W.2d 728 ; Pratt v. Midema, 311 Mich. 64 , 18 N.W.2d 279 ; Finan v. Finan, Sup., 47 N.Y.S.2d 429 ; Glaser v. Glaser, 276 N.Y. 296 , 12 N.E.2d 305 ; Standish v. Standish, 179 Misc. 564 , 40 N.Y.S.2d 538 ; Stone v. Stone, Dom.Rel.Ct., 44 N.Y.S.2d 558 .

1948Ex parte Jones, 249 Ala. 386 , 31 So.2d 314 ; Davis v. Davis, 305 U.S. 32, 41 , 59 S.Ct. 3 , 83 L.Ed. 26, 30 , 118 A.L.R. 1518 ; Keller v. Keller, 352 Mo. 877 , 179 S.W.2d 728 ; Pratt v. Midema, 311 Mich. 64 , 18 N.W.2d 279 ; Finan v. Finan, Sup., 47 N.Y.S.2d 429 ; Glaser v. Glaser, 276 N.Y. 296 , 12 N.E.2d 305 ; Standish v. Standish, 179 Misc. 564 , 40 N.Y.S.2d 538 ; Stone v. Stone, Dom.Rel.Ct., 44 N.Y.S.2d 558 .

1948Ex parte Jones, 249 Ala. 386 , 31 So.2d 314 ; Davis v. Davis, 305 U.S. 32, 41 , 59 S.Ct. 3 , 83 L.Ed. 26, 30 , 118 A.L.R. 1518 ; Keller v. Keller, 352 Mo. 877 , 179 S.W.2d 728 ; Pratt v. Midema, 311 Mich. 64 , 18 N.W.2d 279 ; Finan v. Finan, Sup., 47 N.Y.S.2d 429 ; Glaser v. Glaser, 276 N.Y. 296 , 12 N.E.2d 305 ; Standish v. Standish, 179 Misc. 564 , 40 N.Y.S.2d 538 ; Stone v. Stone, Dom.Rel.Ct., 44 N.Y.S.2d 558 .

1948Ex parte Jones, 249 Ala. 386 , 31 So.2d 314 ; Davis v. Davis, 305 U.S. 32, 41 , 59 S.Ct. 3 , 83 L.Ed. 26, 30 , 118 A.L.R. 1518 ; Keller v. Keller, 352 Mo. 877 , 179 S.W.2d 728 ; Pratt v. Midema, 311 Mich. 64 , 18 N.W.2d 279 ; Finan v. Finan, Sup., 47 N.Y.S.2d 429 ; Glaser v. Glaser, 276 N.Y. 296 , 12 N.E.2d 305 ; Standish v. Standish, 179 Misc. 564 , 40 N.Y.S.2d 538 ; Stone v. Stone, Dom.Rel.Ct., 44 N.Y.S.2d 558 .

1948Ex parte Jones, 249 Ala. 386 , 31 So.2d 314 ; Davis v. Davis, 305 U.S. 32, 41 , 59 S.Ct. 3 , 83 L.Ed. 26, 30 , 118 A.L.R. 1518 ; Keller v. Keller, 352 Mo. 877 , 179 S.W.2d 728 ; Pratt v. Midema, 311 Mich. 64 , 18 N.W.2d 279 ; Finan v. Finan, Sup., 47 N.Y.S.2d 429 ; Glaser v. Glaser, 276 N.Y. 296 , 12 N.E.2d 305 ; Standish v. Standish, 179 Misc. 564 , 40 N.Y.S.2d 538 ; Stone v. Stone, Dom.Rel.Ct., 44 N.Y.S.2d 558 .

1948Ex parte Jones, 249 Ala. 386 , 31 So.2d 314 ; Davis v. Davis, 305 U.S. 32, 41 , 59 S.Ct. 3 , 83 L.Ed. 26, 30 , 118 A.L.R. 1518 ; Keller v. Keller, 352 Mo. 877 , 179 S.W.2d 728 ; Pratt v. Midema, 311 Mich. 64 , 18 N.W.2d 279 ; Finan v. Finan, Sup., 47 N.Y.S.2d 429 ; Glaser v. Glaser, 276 N.Y. 296 , 12 N.E.2d 305 ; Standish v. Standish, 179 Misc. 564 , 40 N.Y.S.2d 538 ; Stone v. Stone, Dom.Rel.Ct., 44 N.Y.S.2d 558 .

2015This principle stems from the full faith and credit clause and was explained as follows by Chief Justice John Marshall in Hampton v. McConnel, 16 U.S. (3 Wheat.) 234, 235 , 4 L.Ed. 378 (1818): “[T]he judgment of a state court should have the same credit, validity and effect, in every other court of the United States, which it had in the state where it was pronounced, and that whatever pleas would be good to a suit thereon in such state, and none others, could be pleaded in any other court in the United States.” The courts of this State have consistently applied the full faith and credit clause

2015This principle stems from the full faith and credit clause and was explained as follows by Chief Justice John Marshall in Hampton v. McConnel, 16 U.S. (3 Wheat.) 234, 235 , 4 L.Ed. 378 (1818): “[T]he judgment of a state court should have the same credit, validity and effect, in every other court of the United States, which it had in the state where it was pronounced, and that whatever pleas would be good to a suit thereon in such state, and none others, could be pleaded in any other court in the United States.” The courts of this State have consistently applied the full faith and credit clause

2015The Supreme Court of the United States explained this distinction between a subject-matter-jurisdiction challenge and a merit-based challenge in Fauntleroy v. Lum, 210 U.S. 230, 234-35 , 28 S.Ct. 641 , 52 L.Ed. 1039 (1908): “No doubt it sometimes may be difficult to decide whether certain words in a statute are directed to jurisdiction or to merits, but the distinction between the two is plain.

2015The Supreme Court of the United States explained this distinction between a subject-matter-jurisdiction challenge and a merit-based challenge in Fauntleroy v. Lum, 210 U.S. 230, 234-35 , 28 S.Ct. 641 , 52 L.Ed. 1039 (1908): “No doubt it sometimes may be difficult to decide whether certain words in a statute are directed to jurisdiction or to merits, but the distinction between the two is plain.

2015She asserts that the Georgia court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to issue the Georgia judgment for two reasons — because it purported to effect a second-parent adoption in which a living parent’s parental rights were not terminated and because V.L. allegedly was not a bona fide Georgia resident at the time of the judgment; however, V.L. argues that these arguments in fact implicate only the merits of the Georgia judgment, and not the Georgia court’s subject-matter jurisdiction, and the arguments are therefore, V.L. argues, barred by the full faith and credit clause, which “precludes any i

2015She asserts that the Georgia court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to issue the Georgia judgment for two reasons — because it purported to effect a second-parent adoption in which a living parent’s parental rights were not terminated and because V.L. allegedly was not a bona fide Georgia resident at the time of the judgment; however, V.L. argues that these arguments in fact implicate only the merits of the Georgia judgment, and not the Georgia court’s subject-matter jurisdiction, and the arguments are therefore, V.L. argues, barred by the full faith and credit clause, which “precludes any i

2014Co. v. Industrial Accident Comm’n of California, 306 U.S. 493, 501 , 59 S.Ct. 629 , 83 L.Ed. 940 (1939) ("[Tjhe very nature of the federal union of states, to which are reserved some attributes of sovereignty, precludes resort to the full faith and credit clause as the means for compelling a state to substitute the statutes of other states for its own statutes dealing with a subject matter concerning which it is competent to legislate.”); Monarch Refrigerating Co. v. Faulk, 228 Ala. 554, 557 , 155 So. 74, 76 (1934) ("[I]t is not always obligatory, either on the ground of comity or duty, that o

2014Co. v. Industrial Accident Comm’n of California, 306 U.S. 493, 501 , 59 S.Ct. 629 , 83 L.Ed. 940 (1939) ("[Tjhe very nature of the federal union of states, to which are reserved some attributes of sovereignty, precludes resort to the full faith and credit clause as the means for compelling a state to substitute the statutes of other states for its own statutes dealing with a subject matter concerning which it is competent to legislate.”); Monarch Refrigerating Co. v. Faulk, 228 Ala. 554, 557 , 155 So. 74, 76 (1934) ("[I]t is not always obligatory, either on the ground of comity or duty, that o

1996Although the Disctronics Group defendants argue otherwise, that agreement extinguished the prior debtor-creditor relationship, transforming the debt owed to Quixote Corporation into equity in DMI and LVAC. 2 Delaware law is the law applicable to the plaintiffs' breach of fiduciary duty claims, because "[t]he established rule of conflicts law is that 'the internal corporate relationship is governed by the law of the state of incorporation.' " Massey v. Disc Mfg., Inc. , 601 So.2d 449 , 454 (Ala. 1992) (quoting P. John Kozyris, Corporate War and Choice of Law , 1985 Duke L.J. 1 , 15). 3 Even if

1990The Missouri court found, however, that the policy of the full faith and credit clause "does not grant carte blanche to a rendering state to infringe on the legitimate interests of a forum state simply by virtue of a valid judgment entered in the rendering state." Thompson , at 86 . " '[T]here comes a point beyond which the imposition of the will of one state beyond its own borders involves a forbidden infringement of some legitimate domestic interest of the other,' [ Yarborough v. Yarborough , 290 U.S. 202 , at 215, 54 S.Ct. 181 , at 186, 78 L.Ed. 269 (1933)], and that that 'point' was especi

1990The Missouri court found, however, that the policy of the full faith and credit clause "does not grant carte blanche to a rendering state to infringe on the legitimate interests of a forum state simply by virtue of a valid judgment entered in the rendering state." Thompson , at 86 . " '[T]here comes a point beyond which the imposition of the will of one state beyond its own borders involves a forbidden infringement of some legitimate domestic interest of the other,' [ Yarborough v. Yarborough , 290 U.S. 202 , at 215, 54 S.Ct. 181 , at 186, 78 L.Ed. 269 (1933)], and that that 'point' was especi

1990Thompson, supra. In Thompson , the Missouri Court of Appeals reasoned that there were competing policies at issue: First, the full faith and credit clause of Art.

1990The Missouri court found, however, that the policy of the full faith and credit clause "does not grant carte blanche to a rendering state to infringe on the legitimate interests of a forum state simply by virtue of a valid judgment entered in the rendering state." Thompson , at 86 . " '[T]here comes a point beyond which the imposition of the will of one state beyond its own borders involves a forbidden infringement of some legitimate domestic interest of the other,' [ Yarborough v. Yarborough , 290 U.S. 202 , at 215, 54 S.Ct. 181 , at 186, 78 L.Ed. 269 (1933)], and that that 'point' was especi

1989The result would be denial of the counterclaim and, with it, possible loss of the Illinois judgment for purposes of collection in Alabama.” In Ultracashmere House, Ltd. v. Meyer, 664 F.2d 1176 (11th Cir.1981), the following appears: “The full faith and credit clause of the Federal Constitution, U.S. Const, art. 4, § 1, is binding only on state courts.

1984Wilson v. Lee , 406 So.2d 416 (Ala.Civ.App. 1981).

1984Justice Burton noted: "[I]t is now too well settled to be open to further dispute that the full faith and credit clause and the act of Congress passed pursuant to it do not entitle a judgment in personam to extraterritorial effect if it be made to appear that it was rendered without jurisdiction over the person sought to be bound." (Footnotes omitted.) May , 345 U.S. at 533 , 73 S.Ct. at 843 (quoting Baker v. Baker, Eccles Co. , 242 U.S. 394 , 401 , 37 S.Ct. 152 , 154 , 61 L.Ed. 386 (1917)).

1984Justice Burton noted: "[I]t is now too well settled to be open to further dispute that the full faith and credit clause and the act of Congress passed pursuant to it do not entitle a judgment in personam to extraterritorial effect if it be made to appear that it was rendered without jurisdiction over the person sought to be bound." (Footnotes omitted.) May , 345 U.S. at 533 , 73 S.Ct. at 843 (quoting Baker v. Baker, Eccles Co. , 242 U.S. 394 , 401 , 37 S.Ct. 152 , 154 , 61 L.Ed. 386 (1917)).

1984Justice Burton noted: "[I]t is now too well settled to be open to further dispute that the full faith and credit clause and the act of Congress passed pursuant to it do not entitle a judgment in personam to extraterritorial effect if it be made to appear that it was rendered without jurisdiction over the person sought to be bound." (Footnotes omitted.) May , 345 U.S. at 533 , 73 S.Ct. at 843 (quoting Baker v. Baker, Eccles Co. , 242 U.S. 394 , 401 , 37 S.Ct. 152 , 154 , 61 L.Ed. 386 (1917)).

1984Justice Burton noted: "[I]t is now too well settled to be open to further dispute that the full faith and credit clause and the act of Congress passed pursuant to it do not entitle a judgment in personam to extraterritorial effect if it be made to appear that it was rendered without jurisdiction over the person sought to be bound." (Footnotes omitted.) May , 345 U.S. at 533 , 73 S.Ct. at 843 (quoting Baker v. Baker, Eccles Co. , 242 U.S. 394 , 401 , 37 S.Ct. 152 , 154 , 61 L.Ed. 386 (1917)).

1984As we stated in Morse v. Morse , 394 So.2d 950 (Ala. 1981): "The Constitution of the United States, Article IV, Section 1, requires that `full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records and judicial proceedings of every other state.' The judgment of the court of another state having jurisdiction of the subject matter and persons is entitled to full faith and credit in Alabama courts." The full faith and credit clause generally requires every state to give foreign judgments at least the res judicata effect which the judgment would have been accorded in the state i

1983It is at most an irregularity, the judgment is not void and should be entered in a sister state." 302 F. Supp. at 200 .

1983Combs , 302 F. Supp. at 201 .

1983In McCarty v. McCarty , 453 U.S. 210 , 101 S.Ct. 2728 , 69 L.Ed.2d 589 (1981), it was determined that federal law precludes a state court from dividing military retirement pay pursuant to state community property laws.

1983In McCarty v. McCarty , 453 U.S. 210 , 101 S.Ct. 2728 , 69 L.Ed.2d 589 (1981), it was determined that federal law precludes a state court from dividing military retirement pay pursuant to state community property laws.

1981In Pruitt v. Key , 281 Ala. 433 , 203 So.2d 450 (1967) the Alabama Supreme Court observed: The full faith and credit clause of the United States Constitution does not compel a court to set aside a judgment rendered in an action involving the same issue which is subsequently adjudicated with a different result by a court of a sister state.

1981In Pruitt v. Key , 281 Ala. 433 , 203 So.2d 450 (1967) the Alabama Supreme Court observed: The full faith and credit clause of the United States Constitution does not compel a court to set aside a judgment rendered in an action involving the same issue which is subsequently adjudicated with a different result by a court of a sister state.