Short answer. Yes. Rule 39, Section 6 expressly allows this: once your action to revive the judgment succeeds and the revived judgment is entered, that revived judgment may again be enforced by motion within five years from the date of its own entry, and only after those five years lapse would you need to bring another action.
What the law says
A final and executory judgment or order may be executed on motion within five years from the date of its entry. After the lapse of such time, and before it is barred by the statute of limitations, a judgment may be enforced by action. The revived judgment may also be enforced by motion within five years from the date of its entry and thereafter by action before it is barred by the statute of limitations.
Rule 39, Section 6 — Execution by motion or by independent action. Read the full provision →
The original five-year rule
Rule 39, Section 6 starts with the ordinary rule: a final and executory judgment may be executed on motion within five years from the date it was entered. That is the simple, low-cost route -- no new complaint, no new filing fees, no starting a lawsuit over. Once five years pass without execution, motion is no longer available, and the only way to enforce the judgment is to file a separate action to revive it before the statute of limitations bars that action too.
What happens once the judgment is revived
This is where your situation is addressed directly. The rule does not treat the revived judgment as permanently stuck in "action only" mode. It states plainly: the revived judgment may also be enforced by motion within five years from the date of its entry -- meaning the entry of the revived judgment itself, not the original one. Reviving the judgment through a new action effectively restarts the same cycle: a fresh five-year window in which the judgment can again be enforced simply by motion.
Why the date that matters changes
The key shift is which date starts the clock. For the original judgment, the five years ran from its own date of entry. After revival, the five years for motion enforcement runs from the date of entry of the revived judgment -- the outcome of your revival action -- not from the original judgment's entry date. As long as you are within five years of that later date, a motion is the proper and available way to enforce it.
What comes after that window closes again
The rule applies the same structure a second time: after the revived judgment's own five-year period for motion enforcement lapses, enforcement again requires an action, and that action must itself be brought before it is barred by the statute of limitations. So the cycle of motion, then action if needed, is not a one-time allowance -- it repeats, and a judgment does not become permanently unenforceable simply because more than five years have passed since it was first entered, so long as revival and the applicable time limits are respected along the way.