Bamberger v. Green
| Decision Date | 16 January 1912 |
| Parties | BAMBERGER v. GREEN. |
| Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Jackson County.
Action by Julia C. Green against Julius Bamberger. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed and remanded, with directions to dismiss petition.
W Pratt Dale and W. H. Clark, for appellant.
A. W Baker and J. R. Llewellyn, for appellee.
In the year 1880 R. M. Green was indebted to Kahn, Wolf & Sons Bamberger, Bloom & Co., and other merchants. For the purpose of securing the indebtedness, he and his wife, Julia C Green, executed, acknowledged, and delivered to them a mortgage on four tracts of land situated in Jackson county. Three of these tracts belonged to R. M. Green, while the fourth had been patented to R. M. Green in the name of his wife, Julia, and belonged to her. The indebtedness not being paid, the mortgagees instituted proceedings in the Jackson circuit court during the year 1881 to enforce their lien and subject the mortgaged property to the payment of their respective claims. The indorsement of the clerk on the petition, though somewhat blurred and illegible, shows that summons was issued. There were several continuances of the case. Later on there was a judgment of sale. The property was sold, and appellant Julius Bamberger, as trustee for the creditors, became the purchaser, and a deed approved by the court was executed to him by the commissioner. The case was then filed away. In 1910 Julia C. Green, alleging that she had the legal title to and was in possession thereof, brought this action to quiet her title to the tract of land patented to her and embraced in the mortgage. Appellant answered and pleaded the judgment and other steps in the foreclosure proceedings, and his title thereunder, in bar of a recovery. Appellee replied that the judgment and all other proceedings were void because she was not served with summons, and did not enter her appearance to the action by answer or otherwise. She also charged other irregularities in the proceedings, which it will not be necessary to set out at length. Upon submission of the case, appellee's title was quieted, and from that judgment so entered this appeal is prosecuted.
We deem it unnecessary to discuss the evidence bearing upon the questions of fact. The attack made by appellee upon the judgment in question is not direct, but collateral. It is a well-settled rule that domestic judgments rendered in a court of general jurisdiction cannot be collaterally attacked unless...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Warfield Natural Gas Co. v. Ward
... ... evidence. The matter of summons or appearance in the case is ... particularly of that class. Bamberger v. Green, 146 ... Ky. 258, 142 S.W. 384; Crider v. Sutherland, 186 Ky ... 7, 216 S.W. 57; Dean v. Brown, 261 Ky. 593, 88 ... S.W.2d 298. We ... ...
-
Warfield Natural Gas Co. v. Ward
...not be established by extrinsic evidence. The matter of summons or appearance in the case is particularly of that class. Bamberger v. Green, 146 Ky. 258, 142 S.W. 384; Crider v. Sutherland, 186 Ky. 7, 216 S.W. 57; Dean v. Brown, 261 Ky. 593, 88 S.W. (2d) 298. We held in Wolverton v. Baynham......
-
Baker v. Baker, Eccles & Co.
... ... jurisdiction in the court to render the judgment that appears ... upon the record. Banberger v. Green, 146 Ky. 258, ... 142 S.W. 384; Maysville R. R. Co. v. Ball, 108 Ky ... 241, 56 S.W. 188, 21 Ky. Law Rep. 1693; Dennis v ... Alves, 132 Ky ... ...
-
Shane v. Peoples
...may be irregular and defective, the judgment, if valid upon its face, is not, as a rule, subject to collateral attack. Bamberger v. Green, 146 Ky. 258, 142 S. W. 384;Moore Realty Co. v. Carr, 61 Or. 34, 120 Pac. 742. It is not sufficient, in order to overcome the presumption in favor of the......