Legal Opinion

Shriners Hosps. for Children v. Cox

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided February 7, 2019No. SC S064390PublishedCited by 3 opinions

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

  1. William Edwards v. Aetna Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1982
  2. Hampton Tree Farms, Inc. v. JewettOregon Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Garner v. GarnerOregon Supreme Court · 1948
  4. Wink v. MarshallOregon Supreme Court · 1964
  5. Sprang v. Petersen Lumber, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1990

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Dept. of Human Services v. C. M. H.Oregon Supreme Court · 2021
  2. Eller v. ABM Industries Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2026
  3. Shriners Hospitals for Children v. CoxCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API