Trinsey v . Pagliaro , 229 F . Supp . 647 (E.D. Pa . 1964 ) -
“Statements of counsel in their briefs or argument are not sufficient for purposes of granting motions to dismiss or summary judgment”
20190227160657793_00000007.pdf (670.3 KB)
From video: “lack of subject matter jurisdiction is not waiverable, and can even be raised on appeal after judgement on the merits”
Capron v. Van Noorden, 6 U.S. 126 (1804)
service-ll-usrep-usrep006-usrep006126-usrep006126.pdf (83.5 KB)
Caveat, if not repugnant?:
from the video: “allegations in pleadings are not to be considered as evidence tending to establish jurisdiction except for the limited purpose of determining type of action”
https://nebraskalegislature.gov/laws/laws-index/chap27-full.html
from the video: “an affidavit where it did not appear therein that the affiant had competent knowledge of the facts sworn to was not a sufficient compliance with” - RS 232-118 and 232-119?
1906_journal.pdf (5.4 MB)
from the video - “in order to enter a valid judgement in the district court by default in a suit on a promissory note”
State ex rel. Bond v. Fisher, 230 Mo. 325, 130 S.W. 35 (1910)
https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1173&context=ls
from the video - “where the court has undertaken to require proof as to liability as well as damages, judgment should not be entered unless plaintiff’s liability proofs are competent and persuasive.”
https://law.justia.com/cases/new-jersey/appellate-division-published/1987/217-n-j-super-496-0.html
“The proposition that the judgment of a court lacking jurisdiction is void traces back to the English Year Books”, see
Bowser v. Collins, Y. B. Mich. 22 Edw. IV, f. 30, pl. 11, 145
Eng. Rep. 97 (Ex. Ch. 1482), and was made settled law by
Lord Coke in Case of the Marshalsea, 10 Coke Rep. 68b, 77a,
77 Eng. Rep. 1027, 1041 (K. B. 1612).
from video: “under Texas law, no-answer defaults are not presumed to be final judgements”
(where not repugnant)
NO-ANSWER DEFAULT JUDGMENT
A no-answer default judgment cannot withstand a direct attack by a defendant who shows that
he was not served in strict compliance with the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. Wilson v.
Dunn, 800 S.W.2d 833, 836 (Tex. 1990); Hubicki, 226 S.W.3d at 407. In contrast to the usual
rule that presumptions will be made in support of a judgment, when examining a default
judgment, we accord no presumption of valid issuance, service, or return of citation. Uvalde
Country Club v. Martin Linen Supply Co., 690 S.W.2d 884, 885 (Tex. 1985) (per curiam).
Failure to strictly comply with the Rules of Civil Procedure renders any attempted service of
process invalid and of no effect. Hubicki, 226 S.W.3d at 408; Wilson, 800 S.W.2d at 836.In a no-answer default judgment, the defendant’s failure to answer the suit acts as an
admission of all facts properly pled in the petition except for the amount of unliquidated
damages. See Dolgencorp of Tex., Inc. v. Lerma, 288 S.W.3d 922, 930 (Tex. 2009) (per
curiam).A no-answer default judgment may not be rendered against a defendant who has filed an
answer. Faunce v. NCNB Tex. Nat’l Bank, 846 S.W.2d 876, 877 (Tex. App.-- Houston [14th
Dist.] 1992, no writ) (opinion on rehearing); see also Tex. R. Civ. P. 239.
Jackson v. Textron Fin. Corp. (Tex.App. – Houston [14th Dist.] Apr. 14, 2009)(Boyce)
One moment, please....
“Although a judgment entered after a conventional trial on the merits is presumed final, summary judgments and default judgments are not entitled to such a presumption.”
First City, Texas-Beaumont, N.A. v. Phelan, 829 S.W.2d 372 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 1992, writ denied)
Babcock & Wilcox Co. v. Parsons Corp., 430 F.2d 531 (8th Cir. 1970)
“Subject matter jurisdiction cannot be waived by the parties, conferred by consent, or ignored by the court.”
Google Gemini Says:
Athens v. McGinnis, 164 Ariz. 320 (1990). (Note: While this is a common Arizona citation, the principle is universal and frequently cited in “Void Judgment” manuals).
The Verbiage: “Subject matter jurisdiction may not be waived and courts may raise the issue sua sponte.”
The Meaning: Sua sponte means “of its own accord.” This citation is used to argue that a judge has a duty to stop a case and dismiss it if they realize they lack jurisdiction, even if the defendant is too inexperienced or distracted to bring it up.
Edwards v. Department of Corrections, 514 So. 2d 104 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987).
The Verbiage: “Lack of subject matter jurisdiction is a defense that is never waived.”
The Meaning: In most legal situations, if you don’t “use it,” you “lose it” (waiver). Edwards is the authority for the exception: Subject Matter Jurisdiction is a “super defense.” You can’t accidentally lose the right to challenge it just because you forgot to put it in your initial answer.
The “Zenith” (Cenith) Citation
Full Case: Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc., 395 U.S. 100 (1969). (The spelling “Cenith” in your notes is a common phonetic typo in legal research).
The Verbiage: “Subject matter jurisdiction can never be waived, and can be raised at any time, even after trial.”
The Meaning: This is a United States Supreme Court case. It is the “heavy hitter” in your list. It establishes that even if a case has gone all the way through trial, through a verdict, and into a final judgment, the losing party can still stand up and say, “Wait, this court never had the power to hear this,” and the whole result must be vacated.
Footnotes (from video description):
7 Essential Elements of Subject Matter Jurisdiction
(Four ‘legs’ to the ‘Subject Matter Jurisdiction’ ‘Table’… if any leg is missing the table ‘will not stand’ = court has no jurisdiction)
Leg 1
- Court of proper Venue
- Judge with Oath
Leg 2
3. Plaintiff
4. Sworn Complaint / Affidavit
Leg 3
5. Competent Witness
6. Sworn Affidavit
Leg 4
7. ‘In Personam’ Jurisdiction over the Defendant
