Veeder v. Fiske

New Mexico Supreme Court

Veeder v. Fiske

6 N.M. 288

CourtNew Mexico Supreme Court

DecidedAugust 21, 1891

DocketNo. 479

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 6 N.M. 288 (Veeder v. Fiske) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Mexico Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Veeder v. Fiske, 6 N.M. 288 (N.M. 1891).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION.

Per Curiam.

The judgment below is regular on its face, and it was not opened or set aside. The order for restitution duly followed the judgment, being a necessary incident. If its execution injuriously affected ■a stranger to the record, he had an obvious remedy by ■an independent action, but no right to any summary proceedings affecting the judgment or its result. Therefore, the order vacating the order for restitution was by an inadvertence irregularly made, and must be reversed, and the cause remanded to the district court for further action not inconsistent with this opinion.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

OPINION.

Per Curiam.

The judgment below is regular on its face, and it was not opened or set aside. The order for restitution duly followed the judgment, being a necessary incident. If its execution injuriously affected ■a stranger to the record, he had an obvious remedy by ■an independent action, but no right to any summary proceedings affecting the judgment or its result. Therefore, the order vacating the order for restitution was by an inadvertence irregularly made, and must be reversed, and the cause remanded to the district court for further action not inconsistent with this opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 N.M. 288, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/veeder-v-fiske-nm-1891.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack