[Title] Case accepting the default judgment handed down by the Federal District Court in the U.S. State of Nevada and “mutual guarantee”. [Deciding Court] Tokyo District Court [Date of Decision] 16 December 1991 [Case No.] Case No. 6792 (Wa ) of 1991 [Case Name] Application for Enforcement of Foreign Judgment [Source] Hanrei Taimuzu No. 794: 246 [Party Names] plaintiff Las Vegas Hilton Hospitality, Inc. defendant Toshiaki Aomatsu(Chin Shunichi) [Summary of Facts] X (Plaintiff) filed a suit against the Y (Defendant) seeking the payment of monies in the Federal District Court in the U.S. State of Nevada. Y received service of the summons required for the suit to proceed at the Desert Inn Hotel and Casino on 5 May 1990. On 29 June 1990, a default judgment was handed down and registered in X’s favor after Y failed to appear. The judgment became final and conclusive on 22 March 1991. Of the monies owing pursuant to the Nevada judgment, Y paid to X the sum of USD $20,000 on 6 June 1990 and USD $30,000 on 9 July 1990 and the Plaintiff applied both these payments to the reduction of the principal amount owing. X filed a suit in the Tokyo District Court seeking an enforcement judgment based on the judgment of the Nevada Federal District Court. (Note: X argued that foreign judgments were recognized under the Nevada Revised Statutes Article 17.350, which provided that,
‘An exemplified copy of any foreign judgment may be filed with the clerk
of any district court of this state. The clerk shall treat the foreign judgment in the same manner as a judgment of the district court of this state. A judgment so filed has the same effect and is subject to the same procedures, defenses and proceedings for reopening, vacating or staying as a judgment of a district court of this state and may be enforced or satisfied in like manner.’
In relation to requirements of Article 200(iv) of the Code of Civil Procedure, “It is apparent that in the U.S. State of Nevada, when foreign judgments are viewed as meriting treatment with good faith and trust, the same are regarded as having the same validity as judgments of the Nevada District Court. As the foreign judgments are recognized in Nevada pursuant to requirements that do not differ in important respect from those of Article 200 in Japan’s Code of Civil Procedure, the Nevada judgment falls within cases where “there is mutual guarantee” under Item (iv). (We note that there is also no dispute between the parties on this point).” In relation to the other requirements in Article 200 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the court held that “looking at all the evidence as a whole, there is no requirement lacking” before accepting Y’s defense, “Since this court may, at present, order compulsory to the extent of ordering the payment of an amount of USD $130,000 with USD $27,148 for interest prior to the Nevada judgment, and USD $187,184 for the period from 29 June 1990, when the Nevada judgment was registered, to 9 July 1990, when the USD $30,000 was paid and JPY [USD $?]157,184 for the period from 10 July 1990 until the date of final payment, each at an annual rate of 8.09%, the Plaintiff’s claim is accepted to this extent and is otherwise dismissed as groundless.” In the result, the Plaintiff’s claims were accepted in part.
[Keywords] Article 200 (iv) of the Old Code of Civil Procedure judgment of execution Federal District Court in the U.S. State of Nevada reciprocity
SECTION 125 FLEXIBLE BENEFIT PLANS A Summary of the Reimbursement Account Arrangement Thank you for electing to participate in the flexible spending portion of the Section 125 Flexible Benefit Plan being sponsored by your employer. The amounts you have elected to be set aside for your Unreimbursed Medical Expense and/or your Dependent Day Care Expense Account will be in f