judgment rendered violation (Texas) · Go Syfert
← Texas issues

judgment rendered violation in Texas

19 Texas opinions name it 3 courts 1929–2026 3 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Texas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (10)

CaseFollowedCited
Pennoyer v. Neffred
· 1878 · cited in 2 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2015–2025
2 sentences

2025“A judgment rendered in violation of due process is void in the rendering State and is not entitled to full faith and credit elsewhere.” Pennoyer v. Neff, 95 U. S. 714, 732-733 (1878).

2015Pennoyer v. Neff, 95 U.S. 714, 732-733 (1878).",[World-Wide Volkwagen Corp. v. Woodso~ 444 U.S. 286 (1980)] Void judgment.

22
Page v. Gellergreen
tex · 1997 · cited in 2 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2005–2010
2 sentences

2010See Page v. Geller, 941 S.W.2d 101, 102 (Tex. 1997); Thompson v. CPN Partners, L.P., 23 S.W.3d 64, 68 (Tex. App.—Austin 2000, no pet.).

2005Page v. Geller , 941 S.W.2d 101, 102 (Tex. 1997).

22
Mapco, Inc. v. Forrestgreen
tex · 1990 · cited in 2 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009
2 sentences

2009Reiss v. Reiss , 118 S.W.3d 439, 443 (Tex. 2003) (quoting Mapco, Inc. v. Forrest , 795 S.W.2d 700, 703 (Tex. 1990)) ("Errors other than lack of jurisdiction, such as 'a court's action contrary to a statute or statutory equivalent,' merely render the judgment voidable so that it may be 'corrected through the ordinary appellate process or other proper proceedings.'").

2009Reiss v. Reiss, 118 S.W.3d 439, 443 (Tex. 2003) (quoting Mapco, Inc. v. Forrest, 795 S.W.2d 700, 703 (Tex. 1990)) (“Errors other than lack of jurisdiction, such as ‘a court’s action contrary to a statute or statutory equivalent,’ merely render the judgment voidable so that it may be ‘corrected through the ordinary appellate process or other proper proceedings.’”).

22
Reiss v. Reissgreen
tex · 2003 · cited in 2 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009
2 sentences

2009Reiss v. Reiss , 118 S.W.3d 439, 443 (Tex. 2003) (quoting Mapco, Inc. v. Forrest , 795 S.W.2d 700, 703 (Tex. 1990)) ("Errors other than lack of jurisdiction, such as 'a court's action contrary to a statute or statutory equivalent,' merely render the judgment voidable so that it may be 'corrected through the ordinary appellate process or other proper proceedings.'").

2009Reiss v. Reiss, 118 S.W.3d 439, 443 (Tex. 2003) (quoting Mapco, Inc. v. Forrest, 795 S.W.2d 700, 703 (Tex. 1990)) (“Errors other than lack of jurisdiction, such as ‘a court’s action contrary to a statute or statutory equivalent,’ merely render the judgment voidable so that it may be ‘corrected through the ordinary appellate process or other proper proceedings.’”).

22
Walling v. Metcalfegreen
tex · 1993 · cited in 2 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2004–2006
2 sentences

2006See Walling , 863 S.W.2d at 58 ; Garcia , 4 S.W.3d at 889 .

2004See Garcia v. Nat’l Eligibility Express, Inc., 4 S.W.3d 887, 889 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, no pet.) (citing Walling v. Metcalfe, 863 S.W.2d 56, 58 (Tex. 1993)); see also Hudson v. Wakefield, 711 S.W.2d 628 630 (Tex.1986).

22
Garcia v. National Eligibility Express, Inc.green
texapp · 1999 · cited in 2 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2004–2006
2 sentences

2006See Walling , 863 S.W.2d at 58 ; Garcia , 4 S.W.3d at 889 .

2004See Garcia v. Nat’l Eligibility Express, Inc., 4 S.W.3d 887, 889 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, no pet.) (citing Walling v. Metcalfe, 863 S.W.2d 56, 58 (Tex. 1993)); see also Hudson v. Wakefield, 711 S.W.2d 628 630 (Tex.1986).

12
Marshall v. Housing Authority of San Antoniogreen
tex · 2006 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2026–2026
1 sentence

2026See id.

11
Stoner v. Thompsongreen
tex · 1979 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014
1 sentence

2014See Stoner, 578 S.W.2d at 683–85.

11
Thompson v. CPN Partners, L.P.green
texapp · 2000 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010
1 sentence

2010See Page v. Geller, 941 S.W.2d 101, 102 (Tex. 1997); Thompson v. CPN Partners, L.P., 23 S.W.3d 64, 68 (Tex. App.—Austin 2000, no pet.).

11
Hudson v. Wakefieldgreen
tex · 1986 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2004–2004
1 sentence

2004See Garcia v. Nat’l Eligibility Express, Inc., 4 S.W.3d 887, 889 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, no pet.) (citing Walling v. Metcalfe, 863 S.W.2d 56, 58 (Tex. 1993)); see also Hudson v. Wakefield, 711 S.W.2d 628 630 (Tex.1986).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (15)

CaseCitedYears
World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson green
scotus · 1980
2 sentences

2015Pennoyer v. Neff, 95 U.S. 714, 732-733 (1878).",[World-Wide Volkwagen Corp. v. Woodso~ 444 U.S. 286 (1980)] Void judgment.

1991World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson, 444 U.S. 286, 291 , 100 S.Ct. 559, 564 , 62 L.Ed.2d 490 (1980).

21991–2015
York v. State green
tex · 2012
1 sentence

2024Id. at 42 . –7– Mother does not argue that York’s no-possible-power exception to the no- extrinsic-evidence rule applies to this case; instead, she asserts that her proposed exception is supported by the following passage in York: [The law] precludes inquiry by evidence [outside] the record in a collateral attack upon a judgment of a domestic court of general jurisdiction, regular on its face, into any fact which the court rendering the judgment must have passed upon in proceeding to its rendition.

12024–2024
Elliott v. Lessee of Peirsol green
· 1828
1 sentence

2015They constitute no justification; and all persons concerned in executing such judgments or· sentences, are considered, in law, as trespassers. " [Elliot v. Piersol, 1 Pet. 328, 340 , 26 US. 328, 340 (1828)] "A judgment rendered in violation of due process is void in the rendering State and is not entitled to full faith and credit elsewhere.

12015–2015
Pns Stores, Inc., D/B/A MacFrugal's Bargain Closeouts D/B/A MacFrugals, Inc. v. Anna E. Rivera as Next Friend for Rachel Rivera green
tex · 2012
1 sentence

2014Id.; PNS Stores, 379 S.W.3d at 273 .

12014–2014
Coronado v. State green
texcrimapp · 1981
1 sentence

1983Coronado v. State, 617 S.W.2d 265 (Tex.Crim.App.1981).

11983–1983
Martin v. State green
texcrimapp · 1972
1 sentence

1972Martin v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 475 S.W.2d 265 ; Taylor v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 420 S.W.2d 601 ; Pena v. State, 167 Tex.Cr.R. 406 , 320 S.W.2d 355 ; Ex parte Hodges, 166 Tex.Cr.R. 433 , 314 S.W.2d 581 .

11972–1972
Taylor v. State green
texcrimapp · 1967
1 sentence

1972Martin v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 475 S.W.2d 265 ; Taylor v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 420 S.W.2d 601 ; Pena v. State, 167 Tex.Cr.R. 406 , 320 S.W.2d 355 ; Ex parte Hodges, 166 Tex.Cr.R. 433 , 314 S.W.2d 581 .

11972–1972
Pena v. State neutral
texcrimapp · 1959
2 sentences

1972Martin v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 475 S.W.2d 265 ; Taylor v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 420 S.W.2d 601 ; Pena v. State, 167 Tex.Cr.R. 406 , 320 S.W.2d 355 ; Ex parte Hodges, 166 Tex.Cr.R. 433 , 314 S.W.2d 581 .

1972Martin v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 475 S.W.2d 265 ; Taylor v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 420 S.W.2d 601 ; Pena v. State, 167 Tex.Cr.R. 406 , 320 S.W.2d 355 ; Ex parte Hodges, 166 Tex.Cr.R. 433 , 314 S.W.2d 581 .

11972–1972
Ex Parte Hodges green
texcrimapp · 1958
2 sentences

1972Martin v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 475 S.W.2d 265 ; Taylor v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 420 S.W.2d 601 ; Pena v. State, 167 Tex.Cr.R. 406 , 320 S.W.2d 355 ; Ex parte Hodges, 166 Tex.Cr.R. 433 , 314 S.W.2d 581 .

1972Martin v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 475 S.W.2d 265 ; Taylor v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 420 S.W.2d 601 ; Pena v. State, 167 Tex.Cr.R. 406 , 320 S.W.2d 355 ; Ex parte Hodges, 166 Tex.Cr.R. 433 , 314 S.W.2d 581 .

11972–1972
Ford v. State green
texcrimapp · 1927
2 sentences

1954“The law does not require minuteness of detail, but demands only that the particular offense be set out with such certainty that a presumptively innocent man seeking to know what he must meet may ascertain fully therefrom the matters charged against him.” Ford v. State, 108 Tex.Cr.R. 626 , 2 S.W.2d 265, 266 .

1954“The law does not require minuteness of detail, but demands only that the particular offense be set out with such certainty that a presumptively innocent man seeking to know what he must meet may ascertain fully therefrom the matters charged against him.” Ford v. State, 108 Tex.Cr.R. 626 , 2 S.W.2d 265, 266 .

11954–1954
Ormsby v. Ratcliffe green
tex · 1928
2 sentences

1932This issue was not requested, an<[ it will be presumed that the trial court found this issue in support of the judgment rendered under the rule announced in the case of Ormsby v. Ratcliffe, 117 Tex. 242 , 1 S.W.(2d) 1084 .

1932This issue was not requested, an<[ it will be presumed that the trial court found this issue in support of the judgment rendered under the rule announced in the case of Ormsby v. Ratcliffe, 117 Tex. 242 , 1 S.W.(2d) 1084 .

11932–1932
Hunt v. Hunt green
texapp · 1917
1 sentence

1929Apparently the Fort Worth Court of Civil Appeals, in Hunt v. Hunt, supra, considered the question without any assignment raising it, and as incidental to a determination of whether or not an amended petition could be regarded as the institution of the suit within the provision requiring six months' previous residence.

11929–1929
Harris v. Harris neutral
texapp · 1908
1 sentence

1929App.) 202 S. W. 787 ; Harris v. Harris, 50 Tex. Civ.

11929–1929
Meredith v. Flanagan neutral
texapp · 1918
1 sentence

1929App.) 202 S. W. 787 ; Harris v. Harris, 50 Tex. Civ.

11929–1929
Snow v. Snow neutral
texapp · 1920
1 sentence

1929In Snow v. Snow, supra, the court had occasion to consider whether a judgment rendered in violation of the statute was void or merely voidable, and concluded that it was void.

11929–1929

Where else courts name it

TX 19 (1929–2026) LA 8 (1915–2014) KS 6 (1892–2010) GA 3 (1907–1955) CT 3 (2010–2014) MS 3 (1882–2015) VI 3 (1987–2017) CA 3 (1928–1958) IN 3 (1896–2023) NC 3 (1994–2018) OK 2 (1930–1980) VT 2 (2012–2013) NJ 2 (1996–2009) IA 2 (1896–1997) NY 2 (2007–2025)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check