Shriners Hosps. for Children v. Cox
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
A judgment may be void because the court that entered it lacked subject matter jurisdiction. Garner v. Garner , 182 Or. 549, 561-62, 189 P.2d 397 (1948). A party cannot stipulate or consent to subject matter jurisdiction, id. , and the Oregon courts accordingly have recognized that generally a party cannot be judicially estopped from later **402seeking to set aside a judgment entered without subject matter jurisdiction, Carey v. Lincoln Loan Co. , 342 Or. 530, 534 n. 2, 157 P.3d 775 (2007). As the court observed in Carey , "[j]udicial estoppel generally does not prevent a party to a case from…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- William Edwards v. Aetna Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1982
- Hampton Tree Farms, Inc. v. JewettOregon Supreme Court · 1995
- Garner v. GarnerOregon Supreme Court · 1948
- Wink v. MarshallOregon Supreme Court · 1964
- Sprang v. Petersen Lumber, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1990
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Dept. of Human Services v. C. M. H.Oregon Supreme Court · 2021
- Eller v. ABM Industries Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2026
- Shriners Hospitals for Children v. CoxCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020