Henlein v. Graham
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Witherspoon, J., Charleston, March, 1889. The order of the Circuit Judge, omitting its statement, was as follows: It is stated in Freeman on Judgments, sections 135 and 142, that when the court has jurisdiction over the subject matter and the person, no error in the exercise of the jurisdiction can make the judgment void.
Read the full summary
Before Witherspoon, J., Charleston, March, 1889. The order of the Circuit Judge, omitting its statement, was as follows: It is stated in Freeman on Judgments, sections 135 and 142, that when the court has jurisdiction over the subject matter and the person, no error in the exercise of the jurisdiction can make the judgment void. In section 47 the same author states, that whatever may have been requisite formerly, it is evident that the sufficiency of the writing claimed to be a judgment, must at least under the Code be tested by its substance rather than its form. If it appears to have been…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Mr. Justice McIver.
On the 18th of October, 1888, the plaintiffs commenced an action against the defendant on a note,, and the complaint, which was in the usual foi’in, together with the summons, was duly served upon the defendant personally on the same day. The defendant failing to appear or answer, the case was placed on calendar 3, and on the call of that calendar, on the first day 'of the next term, to wit, 20th of November, 1888,. plaintiffs moved for judgment, and his honor, Judge Wallace, presiding at that term, entered on said calendar, opposite…
2Cited by3 opinions
- State v. F. B. Williams Cypress Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1913
- Cootey v. RemingtonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1937
- Outlaw v. BarnesSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1921