LOUISE J. TUTTLE, Appellant, v. WILLIAM P. TUTTLE, Respondent.[1]
(181 N. W. 898.)
Judgment—judgment by court of general jurisdiction having jurisdiction of parties and subject-matter cannot be attacked collaterally.
1. A judgment rendered by a court of general jurisdiction, having jurisdiction of the parties and the subject-matter, imports absolute verity. As long as it stands, it cannot be attacked collaterally by any of the parties thereto, or those in privity with them.
Judgment—losing party cannot maintain suit against successful party for obtaining judgment by fraud as long as such judgment remains in force.
2. As long as the former adjudication remains in force, the losing party cannot maintain an action against the successful party for obtaining the judgment by fraudulent and wrongful practices.
Torts—complaint insufficient to state cause of action for wrongfully obtaining judgment.'
3. For reasons stated in the opinion it is held that the complaint in this case fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and that the trial court properly sustained a demurrer thereto on this ground.
ON PETITION FOR REHEARING
Judges — expression of opinion in former suit no ground for disqualification of judge of supreme court.
4. Section 100 of the North Dakota Constitution provides. "In case a judge of the supreme court shall be in any way interested in a cause brought before said court, the remaining judges of said court shall call one of the district judges to sit with them on the hearing of said cause." It is held, in construing this section, that a party litigant is not entitled to have one of the members of the supreme court adjudged disqualified, and to have the remaining members call a district judge to sit in his stead, on the ground that the member sought to be disqualified, in a former action between the same parties, has expressed an opinion, upon
- ↑ NOTE.—That there seems to be considerable diversity of opinion as to the effect upon a decision of a judicial tribunal, or of a tribunal acting in a judicial capacity, of the fact that a part of the judges participating therein are disqualified, will be seen by an examination of the cases collated in a note in L. R. A. 1918D, 244, on effect on judgment of disqualification of a part of the participating judges.
