Legal Opinion

Exotex Corp. v. Rinehart

Wyoming Supreme Court

Decided April 5, 2000No. 97-234PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THOMAS, Justice.

In this case, we hold that a default judgment entered by a clerk of court pursuant to W.R.C.P. 55(b)(1) is void when the theories of recovery that are pleaded do not permit a conclusion that the plaintiff's claim "is for a sum certain, or for a sum which can by *828computation be made certain." The district court denied a motion to set aside the default judgment entered by the clerk of court, A district court has no discretion to refuse to set aside a void judgment upon application for that relief, and we reverse the Order Denying Defendants' Motions. The case is remanded to the…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Perry v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
  2. Poinsettia Dairy Products, Inc. v. the Wessel Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1936
  3. Sandstrom v. SandstromWyoming Supreme Court · 1994
  4. Mount Ida School for Girls v. RoodMichigan Supreme Court · 1931
  5. Lawrence-Allison & Associates West, Inc. v. ArcherWyoming Supreme Court · 1989

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Horn v. WoosterWyoming Supreme Court · 2007
  2. Rocio Esmeralda Mercado Soto Linch v. Ronald B. LinchWyoming Supreme Court · 2015
  3. Downs v. Homax Oil Sales, Inc.Wyoming Supreme Court · 2018
  4. Bryden v. LAKESIDE VENTURES, LLC.Montana Supreme Court · 2009
  5. Exotex Corp. v. RinehartWyoming Supreme Court · 2000

2 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