This page is an unofficial LFoD record and is not legal advice. Verify the document against the official source before relying on it.
McDonald v. Drew
June 1, 1888 - Opinion
Case records
Open case page| Date | Record Text | Type | Party | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| June 1, 1888 | McDonald v. Drew Current page | Opinion | Supreme Court | Reporter |
McDonald v. Drew.
A judgment regularly obtained in another state cannot be impeached for fraud in an action to recover the amount of it here.
Debt, on a New York judgment. Plea, nul tiel record, with a brief statement “ that the said judgment... was had and obtained by the fraud and covin, and by the false and fraudulent testimony of the plaintiff, and with the intent to defraud the defendant of the amount of the said judgment.” The plaintiff moved to reject the brief statement. Motion granted, and the defendant excepted.
D. A. Taggart, for the plaintiff.
Briggs & Huse, for the defendant.
Allen, J.
The judgment upon which the action is brought, and upon which the plaintiff relies if the court where the judgment was rendered had jurisdiction, is conclusive between the parties, and cannot be reversed, set aside, or impeached, for fraud in obtaining it, in this suit. It can be reversed only by a direct proceeding for that purpose in the court where it was rendered. The defence of fraud in obtaining the judgment cannot in this mode be made, °and the brief statement of defence was properly rejected. Metcalf v. Gilmore, 59 N. H. 417.
Exception overruled.
Smith, J., did not sit: the others concurred.