Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

6110Re: [tips_and_tricks] Re: Can someone please help me with this?

Expand Messages
  • The Handyman
    Jul 14, 2004
      Hypothetically, supposed a judge grants a seizure after a foreclosure proceeding when the moving party submits notarized papers alleged to have been witnessed by the notary but in fact were not witnessed.  The notary sealed them without seeing the party actually sign. (done all the time but no less a fraud)  These papers are then used to create a security interest in the property and therefore grounds to grant the seizure and sale upon default. To correct the seizure order error coram nobis would seem proper but voiding a judgment would also work. They both correct errors in the trial court.  Why would you choose voiding a judgment over error coram nobis?  Is there any other method to correct notary fraud?  The notary will lie and say he saw the person sign and the person will say no notary was present. Is such a fraud of magnitude enough to void a judgment? It is definitely an error.

      IMHO, you should NOT go down those paths (error coram nobis...or a motion to annul - or as covered by fed rule 60(b)!).  A provable perjury is a fraud upon the court and denies jurisdiction to the court - including a denial of judicial capacity to the Judge.  A court denied jurisdiction is unable to issue orders in the Judge's judicial capacity and any orders so issued are void on the face of the record according to evidence properly placed in the record to prove such fraud. 
    • Show all 12 messages in this topic