Legal Opinion
Leeks v. Leeks
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided March 20, 1974No. 7470PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
YEAGLEY, Associate Judge:
Defendant appeals from a denial of her “Motion to Vacate Judgment, for New Trial, and Consolidation”. The judgment she sought to have vacated had impressed a trust on real estate in favor of plaintiff. Appellant’s motion to vacate was based on claims that the judgment was void because indispensable parties were not joined and because there was legal error on the face of the record. We affirm the trial court’s refusal to vacate the judgment but order modification of the judgment to protect the rights of parties not joined in the action.
On December 29, 1970, James E.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Ackermann v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Provident Tradesmens Bank & Trust Co. v. PattersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- McShan v. SherrillCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1960
- Elizabeth Annat v. Daniel B. Beard and Warren J. Hamilton, Elizabeth Annat v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1960
- Badami v. BadamiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1968
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Johnson v. Marcheta Investors Ltd. PartnershipDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1998
- Joseph v. ParekhDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1976
- Brown v. Kone, Inc. 2020K L.P.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2004
- EMC Mortgage Corp. v. PattonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2013
- Gustin v. StegallDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1975
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.