Olmstead v. Olmstead
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, Rea, J,, presiding, setting aside, on plaintiff’s application, the judgment of absolute divorce theretofore entered in this action.
1Opinion of the CourtVanderburgh, J.
It is a well-settled principle of jurisprudence that a court has power, upon due proceedings had, to vacate its judgments and decrees for fraudulent practices in obtaining them. Edson v. Edson, 108 Mass. 590. And this may be done upon a summary application like the present. Johnson v. Coleman, 23 Wis. 452; Chauncey v. Wass, 35 Minn. 1, 38, (30 N. W. Rep. 844.) In this case a decree of divorce was entered in due form, but subsequently net aside on plaintiff’s application, by the judge before whom the ease was tried, and who had directed the entry thereof. The evidence upon such application was…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Johnson v. ColemanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1868
- Chauncey v. WassSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1885
- First National Bank v. RandallSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1888
3Cited by17 opinions
- Holt v. HoltSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1909
- Yorke v. YorkeNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1893
- McElrath v. McElrathSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
- Hall v. HallMontana Supreme Court · 1924
- Brockman v. BrockmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1916
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.