Court Opinion

ID: 9537458
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 07:18:35.902512+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:56:42.154667
License: Public Domain

Wright, J.
(dissenting) — I dissent. As to the reasons why the trial court never acquired jurisdiction, I adopt in whole the excellent opinion of Judge Roe dissenting in the Court of Appeals. I shall, however, comment briefly on the nature of jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court of the United States has defined jurisdiction as the "power to decide the case either way, as the merits may require." Erickson v. United States, 264 U.S. 246, 249, 68 L. Ed. 661, 44 S. Ct. 310 (1924). This court has often given the same definition of jurisdiction. In In re Estate of Brown, 7 Wn.2d 717, 110 P.2d 867 (1941), *783we said at page 723: "We have often stated that 'jurisdiction is the power to hear and determine.' State ex rel. Meyer v. Clifford, 78 Wash. 555, 139 Pac. 650."
Since jurisdiction is the power to hear and determine, it necessarily follows that the lack of jurisdiction means a lack of power to hear and determine. In Wesley v. Schneckloth, 55 Wn.2d 90, 346 P.2d 658 (1959), we said at pages 93-94: "Either it [a constitutional court] has or has not jurisdiction. If it does not have jurisdiction, any judgment entered is void ab initio and is, in legal effect, no judgment at all." The purported judgment was worth no more than if it had been signed by any citizen selected at random on the street.
The majority here has suggested, as did the majority in the Court of Appeals, that no right of the defendant has been violated. With that statement, I disagree. Defendant had a right to have her case heard and determined only by a court having jurisdiction. If defendant is to lose her home, it should only be as a result of a judgment of a court having jurisdiction. To take her home by virtue of a void judgment is a serious violation of her rights.
No useful purpose will be served by reiterating any of the discussion contained in the dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals. For the reasons stated therein and herein, I would reverse the trial court and the Court of Appeals for want of jurisdiction.