Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Titles in Соединенные Штаты Америки

There are various investigations and asset searches that may be conducted before going through the recognition and enforcement proceedings. These can include:

• Real property searches using the judgment debtor’s name or other related parties.
• Public records searches (for example, Westlaw’s PeopleMap) that compiles a comprehensive report about an individual judgment debtor, that includes but is not limited to criminal proceedings, addresses, liens, licenses, real property, and any other judgments. Note: most public records searches are fee based.
• Review of an entity’s file in the applicable Secretary of State’s online portal to review whether or not the judgment debtor is still administratively active, conducting business, or involved with any other business in the state.
• Internet search, including social media to find assets such a personal property (jewelry, cars, art, etc.) or real property (vacation homes, investment properties, etc.) through the judgment debtor’s posts.

Florida is commonly seen as a “debtor’s haven” in terms of the various protections available to a debtor against attempts to collect on judgments (or titles, as used in other jurisdictions).  This is certainly true as it pertains to attempts to find financial information about a debtor prior to obtaining a judgment.  Florida courts will not allow pre-judgment discovery or inquiry into a debtor’s assets or ability to pay.  If a creditor can demonstrate another reason for the need to obtain such information (such as the necessity to confirm whether certain transactions were part of an alleged scheme), such creditor may obtain limited financial information, but it will not be allowed to engage in full-blown discovery into a debtor’s assets.  

However, once a judgment is obtained, then Florida courts will allow a judgment creditors to obtain financial information about debtors.  The Florida Rules of Civil Procedure contain a form (Form 1.997) that may be utilized by creditors to obtain asset information about a debtor.  In fact, the judgment itself may require a judgment debtor to complete this form for the judgment creditor, and if the judgment debtor does not comply, it may be held in contempt of court.  Post-judgment, a judgment creditor may also subpoena bank records of the judgment debtor.

With regard to other non-financial (or at least non-banking) information about a judgment debtor, a judgment creditor may also use the subpoena power of the court to obtain information and documents from third parties that may have done business or transacted with, the judgment debtor, regarding those contracts or transactions. 

There are various investigations and asset searches that may be conducted before going through the recognition and enforcement proceedings. These can include:

• Real property searches using the judgment debtor’s name or other related parties.
• Public records searches (for example, Westlaw’s PeopleMap) that compiles a comprehensive report about an individual judgment debtor, that includes but is not limited to criminal proceedings, addresses, liens, licenses, real property, and any other judgments. Note: most public records searches are fee based.
• Review of an entity’s file in the applicable Secretary of State’s online portal to review whether or not the judgment debtor is still administratively active, conducting business, or involved with any other business in the state.
• Internet search, including social media to find assets such a personal property (jewelry, cars, art, etc.) or real property (vacation homes, investment properties, etc.) through the judgment debtor’s posts.

Primarily, yes. Without a recognized judgment from the proper Court, the judgment creditor may not take certain steps to enforce their judgment or obtain interim measures, since their judgment will lack proper authority. Once a court recognizes a foreign judgment, the judgment creditor may then use the court’s power to enforce its judgment. For example, a judgment creditor may utilize the local sheriff’s department to enforce a bank levy to empty known bank accounts or place liens on a judgment debtor’s real property. If a creditor attempts to enforce and collect on its judgment, it provides the judgment debtor with notice and opportunity to transfer, sell, or otherwise dispose of their assets.

However, there is nothing stopping a judgment creditor from demanding payment of a foreign judgment. In practice though, simply demanding payment of a foreign judgment that is not recognized by a local authority will have no teeth and therefore is usually unsuccessful.

Before a foreign judgment can be enforced in Florida, the judgment creditor must follow the steps set forth in Florida’s Uniform Out-of-Country Foreign Money Judgment Recognition Act, found in Chapter 55 of the Florida Statutes (the “FMJRA”), to domesticate and have the foreign judgment recognized and enforced as though it was a Florida judgment.  The same is true for any interim measures—the foreign judgment must first be recognized by Florida courts before any enforcement or interim steps may be taken.

Primarily, yes. Without a recognized judgment from the proper Court, the judgment creditor may not take certain steps to enforce their judgment or obtain interim measures, since their judgment will lack proper authority. Once a court recognizes a foreign judgment, the judgment creditor may then use the court’s power to enforce its judgment. For example, a judgment creditor may utilize the local sheriff’s department to enforce a bank levy to empty known bank accounts or place liens on a judgment debtor’s real property. If a creditor attempts to enforce and collect on its judgment, it provides the judgment debtor with notice and opportunity to transfer, sell, or otherwise dispose of their assets.

However, there is nothing stopping a judgment creditor from demanding payment of a foreign judgment. In practice though, simply demanding payment of a foreign judgment that is not recognized by a local authority will have no teeth and therefore is usually unsuccessful.

The process of a local authority in the U.S. recognizing a foreign judgment is called “domestication”.

A judgment creditor domesticates a foreign country judgment by commencing an action in California court pursuant to California's Uniform Foreign-Country Money Judgments Recognition Act (“UFMJRA”) (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1718(a).

A California court generally must recognize a foreign judgment if it meets the following criteria:

• It grants or denies the sum of money;
• It is final and enforceable under the law of the foreign country where it was rendered; and
• It is not for taxes, fines, penalties, divorce, child/spousal support, or other domestic relations matters.

The requesting party bears the burden of proving a prima facie case of the above, and it is the opposing party’s burden to assert grounds for recognition as discussed below in Section 7.

The process to domesticate a foreign judgment in California is as follows:

• File a legal complaint with the applicable California court in the jurisdiction where the judgment debtor resides and/or has assets. The complaint must set forth claims that establish that the foreign judgment is entitled to recognition under the UFMJRA.
• Once filed, the judgment creditor must serve the judgment debtor with the complaint and other initiating documents.
• When the judgment debtor is served, they will have 21 days to respond to the complaint in California federal court or 30 days in California state court. In their response, the judgment debtor (defendant) may argue grounds for non-recognition.
• If the judgment debtor (defendant) does not respond to the Complaint, the judgment creditor may request the clerk to enter default and, later, for the judge to enter default judgment against the debtor that recognizes the foreign judgment.

As noted above, a judgment creditor must follow the requirements of the FMJRA, which are generally as follows:

• Although not specifically required in the FMJRA, the judgment creditor should obtain a certified translation of the judgment, so that any enforcing court can understand the judgment itself, since all court proceedings are to take place in English in Florida;
• The judgment must be final without the possibility of further appeal;
• The judgment must be filed with the clerk of court and recorded in the public records, along with an affidavit from the creditor that contains the name, social security number, and last known address of the judgment debtor and creditor;
• Upon this filing, the clerk of court will issue notice to the judgment debtor of this recording, giving the judgment debtor 30 days within which to file an objection to the recognition or enforceability of the judgment;
• If there is an objection, the court must have a hearing and enter an order either granting or denying recognition of the judgment;
• If there is no objection, then the clerk of court will enter a certificate of no objection; and
• Upon either the recording of the order recognizing the judgment or the certificate of no objection, the foreign judgment will then be enforceable as though it was entered in Florida.
  

The process of a local authority in the U.S. recognizing a foreign judgment is called “domestication”.

In New York, a judgment creditor domesticates a foreign country judgment by commencing an action in New York court under New York’s Uniform Foreign Country Money Judgments Recognition Act (“UFCMJRA”) (CPLR Article 53).

In New York, a judgment creditor may file a motion for summary judgment in lieu of a complaint, which is the most common method of domestication (CPLR § 5303(c)). However, it can file a complaint per the process below.

A New York generally must recognize a foreign judgment if it meets the following criteria:

• It grants or denies the sum of money;
• It is final and enforceable under the law of the foreign country where it was rendered; and
• It is not for taxes, fines, penalties, divorce, child/spousal support, or other domestic relations matters.

The requesting party bears the burden of proving a prima facie case of the above, and it is the opposing party’s burden to assert grounds for recognition as discussed below in Question 7.

The process to domesticate a foreign judgment in New York is as follows:

• File a legal complaint with the applicable New York court in the jurisdiction where the judgment debtor resides and/or has assets. The complaint must set forth claims that establish that the foreign judgment is entitled to recognition under the UFMJRA.
  
• Once filed, the judgment creditor must serve the judgment debtor with the complaint and other initiating documents.
• When the judgment debtor is served, they will have to respond to the Complaint. In their response, the judgment debtor (defendant) may argue grounds for non-recognition.
• If the judgment debtor (defendant) does not respond to the Complaint, the judgment creditor may request the clerk to enter default and, later, for the judge to enter default judgment against the debtor that recognizes the foreign judgment.
  

The domestication of a judgment process can take between six (6) months to two (2) years depending on whether the judgment debtor opposes recognition and the applicable court’s schedule. The parties have very little control over how long the Court takes to rule on motions or when the matter is set for final adjudication.

In California, the process will remain the same as it is for EU countries because the UFMJRA does not differentiate between EU and non-EU countries. The Act defines a “foreign country” to be any government other than the United States or a United States territory. (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1714(a).

In Florida, the procedure is the same for EU or non-EU judgments.  It is merely a question of whether it is a judgment issued by a foreign court or not.

In New York, the process will remain the same as it is for EU countries because the UFMJRA does not differentiate between EU and non-EU countries. The Act defines a “foreign country” to be any government other than the United States or a United States territory. (CPLR § 5301(a)).

The domestication of a judgment process can take between six (6) months to two (2) years depending on whether the judgment debtor opposes recognition and the applicable court’s schedule. The parties have very little control over how long the Court takes to rule on motions or when the matter is set for final adjudication.

The recognition process is very formulaic.  If there is no objection, then the time required will be just over 30 days—time enough for the clerk to issue notice to the judgment debtor, wait the statutory 30-day period, and then issue the certificate of no objection.  If there is an objection, then the process will be longer and will depend on how quickly the judgment creditor can obtain a hearing time before the judge.  This will vary from judge to judge, and could extend the time by a few weeks to a few months, depending on how crowded the docket for the assigned judge is.  And, if the judgment debtor appeals the decision by the trial court, this could extend the time by months if not more than a year.

The domestication of a judgment process can take between six (6) months to two (2) years depending on whether the judgment debtor opposes recognition and the applicable court’s schedule. The parties have very little control over how long the Court takes to rule on motions or when the matter is set for final adjudication.

The cost of domesticating a judgment in the U.S. varies state to state. However, the cost to domesticate a judgment is cheaper than litigating a matter from the beginning. This is because there is little to no discovery process in domesticating a foreign judgment, and any trials of a recognition case are in front of judge, not a jury.

The cost of domestication depends on a variety of factors, including: (1) location of domestication and cost of local counsel; (2) whether the judgment debtor (defendant) responds to the Complaint; (3) if the judgment debtor substantively opposes the Complaint.  The majority of the cost will be in the form of attorney’s fees in filing and litigating the domestication, with a small percentage of associated expenses.

Other than legal fees, which will be negotiated between the creditor and counsel, the costs for recording the judgment are limited to a service fee of $42 (at the time this is written), plus the cost of mailing, copy fees, and recording fees.  Generally, a per-page fee is charged for the recordation of documents.  It is difficult to state with certainty as to the total amount of costs, but it would generally be no more than a few hundred dollars, depending on the size of the judgment and accompanying translation itself.

The cost of domesticating a judgment in the U.S. varies state to state. However, the cost to domesticate a judgment is cheaper than litigating a matter from the beginning. This is because there is little to no discovery process in domesticating a foreign judgment, and any trials of a recognition case are in front of judge, not a jury.

The cost of domestication depends on a variety of factors, including: (1) location of domestication and cost of local counsel; (2) whether the judgment debtor (defendant) responds to the Complaint; (3) if the judgment debtor substantively opposes the Complaint.  The majority of the cost will be in the form of attorney’s fees in filing and litigating the domestication, with a small percentage of associated expenses.

The UFMJRA provides mandatory grounds for non-recognition, so if a judgment creditor successfully sets forth any of these grounds, then the foreign judgment must not be recognized.

The grounds for non-recognition are:

• The judgment was not rendered by an impartial tribunal or the procedures did not comply with due process of law;
• The foreign court did not have personal jurisdiction over the defendant; or
• The foreign court did not have subject matter jurisdiction.
  (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1716(b)

Additionally, a California court cannot recognize a judgment for defamation, unless the foreign country's law regarding freedom of speech and press is at least equivalent to US law (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1716(f); 28 U.S.C. § 4102).

The UFMJRA also provides permissive grounds for non-recognition, which the court may rely on if good reason does not outweigh these grounds. These permissive grounds include:

• the defendant did not receive notice of the foreign court proceeding with sufficient time to defend;
  
• the judgment was obtained by fraud depriving the defendant of an opportunity to defend;
• the judgment, cause of action, or claim for relief is adverse to the public policy of California or the US;
• the foreign court proceeding was contrary to an agreement between the parties for resolution of the dispute;
• despite personal service on the defendant, the foreign court was a seriously inconvenient forum;
• there is substantial doubt about the integrity of the rendering court regarding the judgment; or
• the specific proceeding leading to the judgment was not compatible with due process.
  (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1716(c)

The FMJRA applies to monetary judgments.  Under the FMJRA, grounds for nonrecognition include the following:

• The foreign court did not have personal jurisdiction over the defendant;
• The foreign court did not have subject matter jurisdiction;
• The judgment was rendered without sufficient due process protections or by a partial tribunal, or the integrity of the judgment is otherwise in question;
• The defendant did not receive sufficient notice;
• The judgment was obtained by fraud;
• The claims are against the public policy of Florida;
• The judgment conflicts with some other final order in Florida;
• The proceeding that led to the judgment itself did not follow the parties’ agreed-upon dispute resolution (i.e., the parties should have arbitrated their dispute, rather than going to court); and
• The judgment in question is a defamation judgment.
  

The UFMJRA provides mandatory grounds for non-recognition, so if a judgment creditor successfully sets forth any of these grounds, then the foreign judgment must not be recognized.

The grounds for non-recognition are:

• The judgment was not rendered by an impartial tribunal or the procedures did not comply with due process of law;
  
• The foreign court did not have personal jurisdiction over the defendant; or
• The foreign court did not have subject matter jurisdiction.
  (CLPR § 5304).

Additionally, a court cannot recognize a judgment for defamation, unless the foreign country's law regarding freedom of speech and press is at least equivalent to US law. (28 U.S.C. § 4102).

The UFMJRA also provides permissive grounds for non-recognition, which the court may rely on if good reason does not outweigh these grounds. These permissive grounds include:

• the defendant did not receive notice of the foreign court proceeding with sufficient time to defend;
• the judgment was obtained by fraud depriving the defendant of an opportunity to defend;
• the judgment, cause of action, or claim for relief is adverse to the public policy of New York or the US;
• the foreign court proceeding was contrary to an agreement between the parties for resolution of the dispute;
• despite personal service on the defendant, the foreign court was a seriously inconvenient forum;
• there is substantial doubt about the integrity of the rendering court regarding the judgment; or
• the specific proceeding leading to the judgment was not compatible with due process.
  (CLPR § 5304).

Recognition will remain the same because the UFMJRA does not differentiate between EU and non-EU countries.

See the previous answer.  There is no difference.

Recognition will remain the same because the UFMJRA does not differentiate between EU and non-EU countries.

In California, an action must be commenced either (1) within the time during which the judgment is effective in the foreign country or (2) 10 years from the date the foreign judgment became effective, whichever is earlier. (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1721).

There is no time frame specified in the FMJRA, but section 95.11(1), Florida Statutes, limits the time for commencement of an action on a judgment to twenty years following the date of the judgment.

In New York, an action must be commenced either (1) within the time during which the judgment is effective in the foreign country or (2) 20 years from the date the foreign judgment became effective, whichever is earlier. (CPLR § 5303(d)).

Generally, a prevailing party may not recover attorneys’ fees and costs associated with their lawsuit unless they fall within the following exceptions:

• If the contract includes a clause specifying that the prevailing party is entitled to recover;
  
• There is a statutory basis to recover; or
• If there is an equitable basis for recovery, such as bad faith litigation or unreasonable denial of settlement offer.

Legal costs for obtaining recognition and enforcement may be added to the judgment, if there is a contractual or statutory basis for attorneys’ fees in the underlying dispute.  If there is no such original basis, then there is no way to add them at this stage of the proceedings.

Generally, a prevailing party may not recover attorneys’ fees and costs associated with their lawsuit unless they fall within the following exceptions:

• If the contract includes a clause specifying that the prevailing party is entitled to recover;
  
• There is a statutory basis to recover; or
• If there is an equitable basis for recovery, such as bad faith litigation or unreasonable denial of settlement offer.

Once a judgment creditor obtains a money judgment, it can engage in the asset searches listed in above in #1, or it begin utilizing post-judgment discovery. This discovery is different than the discovery during normal litigation because the scope is broad so that the creditor may investigate traditionally excluded areas, such as financials and tax returns.

To collect on a judgment, a creditor can elect to take advantage of various tools afforded to it by the court system. These tools may include:

• Garnishing wages
  
• Levying and selling personal property
• Placing liens on real property
• Freeze assets
• Levying known bank accounts
• Accessing a debtor’s interest in a partnership or LLC
• Obtaining a court order directing the debtor to turn over property or funds
• Requesting the court to assign a debtor’s right to future payment from a third party to the creditor
• Initiate an action against a third party that possesses or controls property in which the judgment debtor has an interest
• Request the court appoint a receiver to oversee the judgment debtor's property or business
• Move for a restraining order or injunction against the judgment debtor
• Pursue the debtor’s out-of-state assets

Determining exactly which steps to take and the order in which to take them varies from case-to-case, and one should consult their Florida attorney as to a plan of action.  However, generally, the recording of a judgment in each county where a judgment debtor has real property will cause the judgment to be a lien against any real property.  Filing a judgment lien certificate in Florida’s central database will serve as a lien against a debtor’s personal property.

Further, the Florida Statutes also provide procedures for garnishment of the debtor’s money held by banks or other third parties, attachment or levy of the debtor’s assets, or replevin of certain types of property.  In certain circumstances, a judgment debtor may be able to pursue proceeds supplementary, which are proceedings to obtain access to property of a judgment debtor held by another, or there may be grounds to pursue an action for fraudulent transfer, which is also governed by statute, as a means of obtaining money that a judgment debtor may have transferred to others to make itself insolvent or to otherwise place the assets beyond the reach of a creditor.

Once a judgment creditor obtains a money judgment, it can engage in the asset searches listed in above in #1, or it begin utilizing post-judgment discovery. This discovery is different than the discovery during normal litigation because the scope is broad so that the creditor may investigate traditionally excluded areas, such as financials and tax returns.

To collect on a judgment, a creditor can elect to take advantage of various tools afforded to it by the court system. These tools may include:

• Garnishing wages
  
• Levying and selling personal property
• Placing liens on real property
• Freeze assets
• Levying known bank accounts
• Accessing a debtor’s interest in a partnership or LLC
• Obtaining a court order directing the debtor to turn over property or funds
• Requesting the court to assign a debtor’s right to future payment from a third party to the creditor
• Initiate an action against a third party that possesses or controls property in which the judgment debtor has an interest
• Request the court appoint a receiver to oversee the judgment debtor's property or business
• Move for a restraining order or injunction against the judgment debtor
• Pursue the debtor’s out-of-state assets

Unfortunately, if a judgment debtor files for bankruptcy, an automatic stay is placed on any collection actions, which includes any recognition actions or judgment enforcement/collection. (11 U.S. Code § 362). The creditor is entitled to participate in the bankruptcy in hopes of recovering some portion of their claim.

If a judgment debtor files for bankruptcy, then all enforcement activities are automatically halted.  Debtors who file for bankruptcy protection in United States courts obtain an “automatic stay” of any enforcement activities. While there are very limited reasons to get the stay lifted, those are very fact-specific and beyond the scope of this endeavor.

Unfortunately, if a judgment debtor files for bankruptcy, an automatic stay is placed on any collection actions, which includes any recognition actions or judgment enforcement/collection. (11 U.S. Code § 362). The creditor is entitled to participate in the bankruptcy in hopes of recovering some portion of their claim.

Federal

The Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) governs the enforcement of arbitration awards that are rendered under a written contract that evidences a transaction involving interstate or foreign commerce or maritime transactions. (9 U.S.C. §§1 and 2).

         Process

Pursuant to the FAA, requests for confirmation of an arbitration award must be submitted by a motion or petition in the proper federal district court. Along with the motion or petition, the petition must file: the arbitration agreement, the selection or appointment of the arbitrator, and the arbitration award. (9 U.S.C. § 13). Once filed, the petitioner must serve the award on all other parties. After service is completed, the court may confirm, vacate, modify, correct, or remand the award back to the arbitrator. (9 U.S.C. §§ 9 to 11).

Unless there are grounds to vacate the award, the court will confirm the award through an entered judgment and the award, through the judgment, will have the same force and effect as a judgment in a civil action and may be enforced like any other judgment. (9 U.S.C. § 13).

         Timing

Under the FAA, a petition must be filed within one (1) year of the date the award is made. (9 U.S.C. §§ 207 and 302)

California

         Authority for Recognizing and Enforcing Arbitration Awards

There are two acts that California courts may use to recognize and enforce foreign arbitration awards: the California Arbitration Act (“CAA”) or the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”).

The CAA governs the enforcement of arbitration awards that are rendered in or outside of California, and the awards must not involve interstate commerce or any scope of federal statutes. (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1286). Otherwise, the FAA applies or the parties can agree to apply the CAA’s enforcement procedures instead.

The criteria for an arbitration award that may be confirmed by a California court are as follows:

• The award must be final;
• It must be in writing and signed by the arbitrator(s); and
• It must include a “determination of all the questions submitted to the arbitrators the decision of which is necessary in order to determine the controversy.”
  (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1283.4)

         Process

The process under the CAA to enforce an arbitration award is to file a petition to confirm the arbitration award in whichever California or federal court that has both personal and subject matter jurisdiction (unless the arbitration agreement contains a forum selection clause). This process is intended to be expedited and usually proceeds quicker than a normal lawsuit.

The California Court system offers a draft petition to confirm form a party can use which must confirm the following: the names of all parties to the arbitration, the substance of (or a copy attached) of the arbitration agreement, the names of the arbitrators, and the award and written opinion of the arbitrators (if any). (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code §§1285 and 1285.4).

Once filed, the petitioner must be served on the other party, and no less than ten (10) days’ notice before any hearing on the confirmation petition. (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1290.2).

The court is then required to confirm the award as it was made unless a correction must be made. (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1286).

An award may be corrected if there is one of the following:

• Evident miscalculation or mistake.
• Issuance in excess of the arbitrator's powers.
• Imperfection in the form of the award.
  (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1286.6)

Otherwise, the court will confirm the award through an entered judgment and the award, through the judgment, will have the same force and effect as a judgment in a civil action and may be enforced like any other judgment. (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1287.4).

Timing

In California, a petition for judicial confirmation must be filed not earlier than ten (10) days after, but not later than four (4) years from the date of service of the executed arbitration award on the petitioner. (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code §§ 1288 and 1288.4).

The above responses are intended to be general in nature. If you have specific questions regarding recognition and enforcement of a foreign Judgment, please feel free to contact Valla, Morrison & Schachne Inc., P.C. for more information.

The above is authored by Lisa Schachne, Shareholder and Executive Vice-President and Leslie Beaudin, Associate Counsel. Both Lisa and Leslie have substantial experience in domesticating and enforcing foreign judgments in Federal Court and in California state courts.

In the United States, the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (also known as the “New York Convention”), found in 9 U.S. § 201 et seq., governs the recognition of all foreign arbitral awards.  Through the New York Convention, federal district courts have been granted original jurisdiction to enforce foreign arbitral awards, regardless of the amount of the arbitration award.  Under this Convention, a party to an arbitration has three years after entry of an arbitral award to apply to the district court for an order confirming the award.  Such court will confirm the award unless there was a lack of notice to the party; the party was otherwise incapacitated; the arbitrator exceeded his or her powers; the arbitration agreement itself was not valid; the arbitration or composition of the arbitral tribunal did not follow the requirements of the agreement or the law governing the proceedings; the subject matter should not have been arbitrated; or finally, enforcement would otherwise be contrary to public policy.

Federal

The Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) governs the enforcement of arbitration awards that are rendered under a written contract that evidences a transaction involving interstate or foreign commerce or maritime transactions. (9 U.S.C. §§1 and 2).

         Process

Pursuant to the FAA, requests for confirmation of an arbitration award must be submitted by a motion or petition in the proper federal district court. Along with the motion or petition, the petition must file: the arbitration agreement, the selection or appointment of the arbitrator, and the arbitration award. (9 U.S.C. § 13). Once filed, the petitioner must serve the award on all other parties. After service is completed, the court may confirm, vacate, modify, correct, or remand the award back to the arbitrator. (9 U.S.C. §§ 9 to 11).

Unless there are grounds to vacate the award, the court will confirm the award through an entered judgment and the award, through the judgment, will have the same force and effect as a judgment in a civil action and may be enforced like any other judgment. (9 U.S.C. § 13).

         Timing

Under the FAA, a petition must be filed within one (1) year of the date the award is made. (9 U.S.C. §§ 207 and 302)

New York

         Authority for Recognizing and Enforcing Arbitration Awards

Article 75 of the New York Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR) provides authority for New York’s arbitration law. However, arbitration awards may also be confirmed and recognized in New York through the New York Convention, the Panama Convention, or the FAA.

         Process

The process to enforce an arbitration award is to file a petition to confirm the arbitration award in whichever New York or federal court that has both personal and subject matter jurisdiction (unless the arbitration agreement contains a forum selection clause). This process is intended to be expedited and usually proceeds quicker than a normal lawsuit.

Once filed, the petitioner must be served on the other party, and no less than ten (10) days’ notice before any hearing on the confirmation petition.

The court is then required to confirm the award as it was made unless a correction must be made.

An award may be corrected if there is one of the following:

• Evident miscalculation or mistake.
• Issuance in excess of the arbitrator's powers.
• Imperfection in the form of the award.

Otherwise, the court will confirm the award through an entered judgment and the award, through the judgment, will have the same force and effect as a judgment in a civil action and may be enforced like any other judgment.

         Timing

A petition to confirm must be made within one (1) year after the award is delivered to the party seeking to enforce it. (CPLR 7510).

The above responses are intended to be general in nature. If you have specific questions regarding recognition and enforcement of a foreign Judgment, please feel free to contact Valla, Morrison & Schachne Inc., P.C. for more information.

The above is authored by Lisa Schachne, Shareholder and Executive Vice-President and Leslie Beaudin, Associate Counsel. Both Lisa and Leslie have substantial experience in domesticating and enforcing foreign judgments in Federal Court and in and New York state courts.