Wyman v. Newhouse case brief summary
93 F.2d 313
SYNOPSIS: Appellant sought review of an order of the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York, dismissing her complaint to enforce a judgment for seduction under promise of marriage.
FACTS:
-Appellant, who had been having an affair with a married man in New York, enticed him to travel to Florida with a false story that she was about to leave the United States.
-When appellee arrived in Florida, he was served with a complaint for seduction under promise of marriage.
- Appellee ignored the summons, and judgment was entered by default.
-Appellant attempted to enforce the judgment in New York.
-The trial court dismissed her case.
HOLDING:
The appellate court affirmed because the judgment was procured fraudulently and without jurisdiction.
RULES:
A judgment procured fraudulently lacks jurisdiction and is null and void. A fraud affecting the jurisdiction is equivalent to a lack of jurisdiction. A judgment recovered in a sister state, through the fraud of the party procuring the appearance of another, is not binding on the latter when an attempt is made to enforce such judgment in another state.
OUTCOME: The appellate court affirmed because the judgment was procured fraudulently and without jurisdiction.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
93 F.2d 313
SYNOPSIS: Appellant sought review of an order of the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York, dismissing her complaint to enforce a judgment for seduction under promise of marriage.
FACTS:
-Appellant, who had been having an affair with a married man in New York, enticed him to travel to Florida with a false story that she was about to leave the United States.
-When appellee arrived in Florida, he was served with a complaint for seduction under promise of marriage.
- Appellee ignored the summons, and judgment was entered by default.
-Appellant attempted to enforce the judgment in New York.
-The trial court dismissed her case.
HOLDING:
The appellate court affirmed because the judgment was procured fraudulently and without jurisdiction.
RULES:
A judgment procured fraudulently lacks jurisdiction and is null and void. A fraud affecting the jurisdiction is equivalent to a lack of jurisdiction. A judgment recovered in a sister state, through the fraud of the party procuring the appearance of another, is not binding on the latter when an attempt is made to enforce such judgment in another state.
OUTCOME: The appellate court affirmed because the judgment was procured fraudulently and without jurisdiction.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
No comments:
Post a Comment