Anonymous ID: 9c6e0e June 1, 2021, 12:43 p.m. No.13807585   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>7598

>>13807540

>WHY IS EVERYONE SO FUCKING EVIL!!!

I've come to believe that TDS is really satanic possession. It seems there's no way

to reach certain people, even sideways with honey-coated words, without somehow

triggering them into apoplectic fits. I'm preparing to see friends and family implode.

Anonymous ID: 9c6e0e June 1, 2021, 1:48 p.m. No.13807988   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>13807378

 

16

On the other hand, the doctrine is equally well settled that the court will not set aside a judgment because it was founded on a fraudulent instrument, or perjured evidence, or for any matter which was actually presented and considered in the judgment assailed. Mr. Wells, in his very useful work on Res Adjudicata, says, sect. 499: 'Fraud vitiates every thing, and a judgment equally with a contract; that is, a judgment obtained directly by fraud, and not merely a judgment founded on a fraudulent instrument; for, in general, the court will not go again into the merits of an action for the purpose of detecting and annulling the fraud.' . . . 'Likewise, there are few exceptions to the rule that equity will not go behind the judgment to interpose in the cause itself, but only when there was some hindrance besides the negligence of the defendant, in presenting the defence in the legal action. There is an old case in South Carolina to the effect that fraud in obtaining a bill of sale would justify equitable interference as to the judgment obtained thereon. But I judge it stands almost or quite alone, and has no weight as a precedent.' The case he refers to is Crauford v. Crauford, 4 Desau. (S. C.) 176. See also Bigelow on Fraud, 170-172.

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/98/61