By: dmc-admin//October 4, 2004//
By: dmc-admin//October 4, 2004//
“If we limited our consideration of the statute to just the words mandating that the clerk include the judgment debtor’s address in the judgment docket, we perhaps could conclude that the clerk’s duty is mandatory even if the judgment did not provide that information. But the statute goes on to address the very scenario presented by this case-the failure of the judgment creditor to include the address of the judgment debtor in the judgment. In that situation, the judgment creditor may correct the omission by filing an affidavit with the clerk providing the missing information. The clerk, in turn, must then enter that information on the judgment docket.
Construing the statute as a whole and recognizing the entire statutory scheme as it pertains to the address of the judgment debtor, we conclude that it is the judgment creditor who has the responsibility to provide the clerk with the judgment debtor’s address. The creditor may do this by initially providing such information in the judgment or by later providing the information via the affidavit procedure.”
Order affirmed.
Recommended for publication in the official reports.
Dist II, Walworth County, Race, J., Nettesheim, J.
Attorneys:
For Appellant: Karl F. Winkler, Rockford, Ill.; Thomas E. Greenwald, Rockford, Ill.
For Respondent: Charles H. Bohl, Milwaukee; Barbara J. Janaszek, Milwaukee; James P. Denis III, Milwaukee