Pates v. St. Clair
Supreme Court of Virginia
At the April term 1848 of the Circuit court of .Bed-ford county, in an action on the case then depending therein in the name of Demarcus Foutz, who sues for the benefit of John D. Pate plaintiff, against Wingfield J. St. Clair defendant, a judgment was rendered in the terms following, viz: This day came the parties, by their attorneys, and by their consent, it is considered by the court that this suit be dismissed; and that the defendant recover against the said John D.…
Read the full summary
At the April term 1848 of the Circuit court of .Bed-ford county, in an action on the case then depending therein in the name of Demarcus Foutz, who sues for the benefit of John D. Pate plaintiff, against Wingfield J. St. Clair defendant, a judgment was rendered in the terms following, viz: This day came the parties, by their attorneys, and by their consent, it is considered by the court that this suit be dismissed; and that the defendant recover against the said John D. Pate, for whose benefit this suit is brought, his cost by him about his defence of this suit expended. On this judgment an…
1Opinion of the CourtLee, J.
The judgment of a court possessing competent jurisdiction in the proceeding before it and over the person against whom it is rendered, is binding and conclusive; and however irregular or erroneous it may be, yet so long as it remains unreversed, it cannot be drawn in question in a collateral proceeding; nor can any allegation be made against its validity. Horsy v. Daniel, 2 Levinz R. 161; Hayward v. Ribbans, 4 East’s R. 311; Prince v. Nicholson, 1 Marsh. R. 280; 1 Chit. PI. 100, 320. So that the only ground on which the plaintiffs in error, in any view, can be permitted to contest the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Garland v. RichesonCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1826
3Cited by3 opinions
- Smith's Adm'r v. Charlton's Adm'rSupreme Court of Virginia · 1851
- Davis v. NollWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1893
- Wartman v. YostSupreme Court of Virginia · 1872