Tennessee Supreme Court· 8/2/1955

Brown v. Brown

Citations

281 S.W.2d 492

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

concluding that in the absence of subject matter jurisdiction, a court cannot enter a valid, enforceable order
concluding that in the absence of subject matter jurisdiction, a court cannot enter a valid, enforceable order
holding that, by alleging a violation of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act, the defendant was effectively put on notice that the plaintiffs were seeking all relief authorized under the Act, including attorney’s fees
holding that the effect of the legislation was to retain decrees for alimony and support within the control of the court entering them to make such modifications “as changed conditions and circumstances may require”
noting that if a “judgment of the Circuit Court . . . is void for want of jurisdiction, it can bind no one and a disobedience of it would not be a contempt.”
“[A] judgment or a decree which is beyond the fair scope of the pleadings is void.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Robert S. Clement

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

131 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

26 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.