Case ID: mass_163/html/0493-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Field, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

T. Henry Pearse vs. Sarah W. Hill.
    Suffolk.
    January 11, 1895.
    May 24, 1895.
    Present: Field, C. J., Holmes, Knowlton, Morton, & Barker, JJ.
    
      Judgment — Avoidance by Plea and Proof.
    
    A judgment of a court of this Commonwealth which had jurisdiction of the subject and the parties cannot be avoided by plea and proof in an action of contract upon it.
    Contract, upon a judgment recovered by the plaintiff, on January 8, 1894, in the Superior Court, in an action against the present defendant upon an account annexed. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Maynard, J., the plaintiff offered in evidence the clerk’s record of the judgment and rested. The defendant offered no evidence, and rested, and asked certain rulings not necessary to be stated. The judge refused to give any of the rulings, and ordered the jury to return a verdict for the plaintiff; and the defendant alleged exceptions. The material facts appear in the opinion.
    
      O. P. Grorely H. II. Newton, for the defendant.
    
      Z. S. Arnold, for the plaintiff, was not called upon.
   Field, C. J.

This action is upon a judgment of a court of this Commonwealth which had jurisdiction of the subject and of the parties. It is regular in form, and is valid between the parties until vacated or reversed. The record of the judgment put in evidence shows that the parties agreed to refer the action, and that the action was referred, and that the referee was authorized to proceed ex parte if either party neglected to appear after due notice. Both parties appeared before the referee by their attorneys, and several hearings were had, after which the original attorney for the defendant withdrew his appearance, and, after due notice to the defendant, the referee proceeded ex parte and made his report, which was accepted and confirmed by the court, and judgment entered thereon. On these facts we do not intimate that by any proceedings the judgment can be vacated or reversed. It cannot be avoided by plea and proof in this action. See Brigham v. Burnham, 12 Allen, 97. Exceptions overruled.