SEC.  93-25-93. Contest of registration or enforcement.

(1) A party contesting the validity or enforcement of a registered order or seeking to vacate the registration has the burden of proving one or more of the following defenses:

 (a) The issuing tribunal lacked personal jurisdiction over the contesting party;

 (b) The order was obtained by fraud;

 (c) The order has been vacated, suspended or modified by a later order;

 (d) The issuing tribunal has stayed the order pending appeal;

 (e) There is a defense under the law of this state to the remedy sought;

 (f) Full or partial payment has been made; or

 (g) The statute of limitation under Section 114 of this act (Choice of law) precludes enforcement of some or all of the arrearage.

 (2) If a party presents evidence establishing a full or partial defense under subsection (1), a tribunal may stay enforcement of the registered order, continue the proceeding to permit production of additional relevant evidence and issue other appropriate orders. An uncontested portion of the registered order may be enforced by all remedies available under the law of this state.

 (3) If the contesting party does not establish a defense under subsection (1) to the validity or enforcement of the order, the registering tribunal shall issue an order confirming the order.

SOURCES: 1997 Laws, Chapter 588, Sec. 116, SB2164, Effective July 1, 1997.

Note: 1997 Laws, Chapter 588, Sec. 150, states as follows:

SECTION 150. Any person or entity shall be absolutely immune from any liability arising from compliance with the dictates of this act unless such conduct by the person or entity is willful and intentional.