Enforcement of Prior Judgment vs. New Cognitive Proceeding for Remediation Compliance

In a case where a party was obligated by a prior judgment to remedy mold damage within 30 days, the subsequent request by the opposing party to be authorized to undertake the repair at the original obligor's expense due to insufficient compliance was correctly dismissed by the initial conciliation authority as an inadmissible new action on a previously decided matter. The appellate court affirmed this, reasoning that determining whether the judicial order for defect remediation was actually complied with is a matter for the enforcement judge, not the ordinary judge in a new cognitive proceeding, despite arguments that the executed painting work only masked the mold and presented a factual dispute requiring expert evaluation; the court clarified that the enforcement judge, applying provisions for summary proceedings, is the proper authority to decide whether the obligation set forth in the original enforceable decision has been fulfilled.