Kath v. Brown

Citations

• 69 Wash. 306
• 124 P. 900
• 1912 Wash. LEXIS 899

Syllabus

<p>Judgment—Conclusiveness—Vacation—Action—Laches. A defendant is estopped by laches and by a restraining order, unappealed from, from attacking a judgment on the ground of fraud, where, on his appeal from an order refusing to vacate the judgment on his petition, the appeal was dismissed because he had failed to obtain permission of the supreme court to attack the judgment, and for three years thereafter neglected to obtain such permission, and was meanwhile restrained from bringing any action affecting plaintiff’s title to the land1 which was the subject of the former suit.</p>