Legal Opinion · Dissent

Gray v. Hall

California Supreme Court

Decided February 1, 1928No. Docket No. Sac. 4050Published

1Dissent

SHENK, J., Dissenting.

I dissent. I am in accord generally with the views expressed by Mr. Justice Preston in his dissenting opinion. I entertain no doubt, however, that the attitude assumed by the respondent herein is in the nature of a collateral attack upon the judgment in the original action of Gray v. Yarbrough. (Howe v. Southrey, 144 Cal. 767 [78 Pac. 259]; Hamblin v. Superior Court, 195 Cal. 364 [43 A. L. R. 1509, 233 Pac. 337].) When such an attack is made an inspection of the judgment-roll alone must disclose whether the judgment is void for want of jurisdiction of the court to…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Forbes v. HydeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
  2. In Re Estate of PuseyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
  3. Clark v. Superior Court of Lassen CountyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
  4. Hamblin v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
  5. In Re Estate of DeanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906

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

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

Powered by the Exa API