Johnson v. Anderson

Citations

• 76 Va. 766
• 1882 Va. LEXIS 78

Syllabus

<p>1. Jurisdiction—Final decrees—Subsequent proceedings.—After final decree the court has no further jurisdiction; either of the subject matter or of the parties, and all subsequent decrees and orders, entered without notice to the parties, are void.</p> <p>2. Idem—Statute of limitations—Case at bar.—Against A, in Ohio, J obtained a -final decree to foreclose a mortgage securing two notes, and received all of first and part of second note. Twelve years later, without notice to A, a decree was entered for balance of second note. In the interval, J filed his bill, in this State, to attach A’s land for the balance. A answered that the cause of action arose July, 1868, and the suit was not brought within five years thereafter. J then filed his supplemental bill, exhibiting a transcript of and setting up the last Ohio decree as a defence against the plea of the statute of limitations. To-this A demurred and plead nul tiel rebord.</p> <p>Held :</p> <p>Tlie Ohio court having no jurisdiction of the cause when its last decree was entered, the decree is Void, and the plea of nul tiel record must be sustained.</p> <p>2. The lex fori governs, and the limitation is five years from rise of cause of action. The action was barred when brought, and the original bill must be dismissed.</p> <p>3. The supplemental bill makes no valid defence against the plea of the statute of limitations. The transcript of the Ohio record referred to and filed with that hill, on demurrer, is considered as much a part thereof as if set out in Tuza verba.</p>