Author:-

Adel Reyes

Reviewer:-

Bianca Padilla

LN BPAC:-

MH Miller

CASE NAME:

Wyman v. Newhouse

CITATION:

93 F.2d 313 (2d Cir. 1937)

RULE:

A judgment procured fraudulently lacks jurisdiction and is null and void. A fraud affecting the jurisdiction is equivalent to a lack of jurisdiction. A judgment recovered in a sister state, through the fraud of the party procuring the appearance of another, is not binding on the latter when an attempt is made to enforce such judgment in another state. 

FACTS:

Appellant, a married woman, who had been having an affair with appellee, a married man, in New York, enticed him to travel to Florida with a false story that she was about to leave the United States to live with her mother in Ireland since her own husband had died. When appellee arrived in Florida, was met by a deputy sheriff who, upon identifying appellee, served him with process in a suit for $500,000. A photographer was present who attempted to take his picture. Appellee returned to New York by plane that evening and consulted his New York counsel, who advised him to ignore the summons served in Florida. He did so, and judgment was entered by default., a jury having assessed the damages.

Appellant attempted to enforce the judgment in New York. Appellee's answer pled facts supporting his claim that he had been fraudulently enticed into the Florida jurisdiction, appellant's state of residence, for the sole purpose of service of process. Appellant's motion to strike out this defense and for summary judgment, was denied. The trial court dismissed her case. The appellate court affirmed because the judgment was procured fraudulently and without jurisdiction.

ISSUE:

Is the judgement null and void?

ANSWER:

Yes.

RATIONALE:

This judgment is attacked for fraud perpetrated upon the appellee which goes to the jurisdiction of the Florida court over his person. A judgment procured fraudulently,  lacks jurisdiction and is null and void. A fraud affecting the jurisdiction is equivalent to a lack of jurisdiction. Appellee was not required to proceed against the judgment in Florida. His equitable defense in answer to a suit on the judgment is sufficient. A judgment recovered in a sister state, through the fraud of the party procuring the appearance of another, is not binding on the latter when an attempt is made to enforce such judgment in another state.  Appellee was not required to make out a defense on the merits to the suit in Florida. 

Lexis Advance URL:-

https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:3S4W-T4T0-003B-K176-00000-00&origination=LSPCasebrief 

Doc Id:-

urn:contentItem:3S4W-T4T0-003B-K176-00000-00