Lockwood v. Mitchell
Lockwood v. Mitchell
Opinion of the Court
This case comes before us on demurrer to the bill, consequently the question to be decided is, simply, whether the facts alleged in the bill would, if true, entitle the party complaining to relief in equity.
The bill, however, in this case, stands on much higher ground. If, as the bill alleges in this case, the complainant was, for a fraudulent purpose, confined in the lunatic asylum, and whilst thus situated, unable to defend his rights, Mitchell and Crawford, taking advantage of his helpless situation, commenced proceedings on a claim that was not due, with a fraudulent intent, and afterward, by fraud and deception, induced his attorneys to dismiss the proceedings, which were pending in New York, and which enjoined them from proceeding on their claim, knowing, a-t the same time, that those attorneys had no right to do so, and then took a decree for an amount much larger than was actually due, on which complainant’s property was sacrificed, it would present a case of unmitigated fraud, attended with great injury to the person on whom it was committed ; a fraud on the court rendering the decree, as well as on the complainant.
A decree or judgment receives its force from the fact, that it is the decision of a competent tribunal, before which both the parties have had an opportunity of appearing and prosecuting their claims, and having them fairly adjudicated. When this is prevented by the fraud or circumvention of one of the parties, without the fault or negligence of the other, the decree or judgment of the court .cease? to have its binding effect, and it is competent for the party injured to resort to a court of chan eery to obtain relief.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.