Legal Opinion

Risman, Partners v. Krupar

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided May 8, 1933No. 12806PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMcGILL, J.

It is to be noted at the outset that no motion or petition was filed seeking to vacate the original cognovit judgment nor is there any claim that there was any fraud in procuring the payment of the judgment.

Sec 11582, GC, reads as follows:

“Judgment and Order. * * * A judgment is the final determination of the rights of the parties in action. A direction of a court or judge made or entered in writing and not included in a judgment, is an order.”

It is well settled that a judgment rendered in a court having jurisdiction of the parties and the subject matter, is binding until set aside or vacated…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Loring v. MansfieldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1821
  2. Peck v. WoodbridgeU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Connecticut · 1808
  3. Shultz v. ShultzIndiana Supreme Court · 1894
  4. Hall v. HallSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1917
  5. White v. . MerrittNew York Court of Appeals · 1852

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Klein v. WhiteheadCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1978
  2. Pulley v. PulleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
  3. Fishman v. AlbertsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1947
  4. Ohio Bureau of Credits, Inc. v. SteinbergAlabama Court of Appeals · 1940
  5. State, Ex Rel. Deran v. MyersOhio Court of Appeals · 1948

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

Powered by the Exa API