Miller v. Preefer

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing a judgment entered in absence of jurisdiction over the subject matter or the person is void and may be attacked at any time
• finding that “settlement agreement, even though it contained an illegal covenant restraining trade, essentially became sheltered within the judgment”
• declining to consider a collateral attack of a judgment incorporating an illegal provision because the allegedly illegal provision only rendered the agreement voidable
• declining to consider a collateral challenge to a judgment incorporating an agreement that contained an allegedly illegal covenant not to compete, on the ground that the alleged illegality merely rendered the agreement voidable
• “A void judgment is one entered in the absence of the court’s jurisdiction over the subject matter or the person.”
• \A void judgment is one entered in the absence of the court's jurisdiction over the subject matter or the person.\ (citing Sterling Factors Corp. v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n, 968 So. 2d 658, 665 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).