Is anyone aware of the differences and advantages in: 1. Motion to Vacate Judgment 2. Motion to Vacate Void Judgment Due to Lack of Jurisdiction I ask because this topic was brought up on a similar thread some time back that I did a search on, and it wasn't completely answered. Thanks for any advice you can provide! __________
A Motion to Vacate is brought because of a procedural error. This is most often failure to properly serve defendant, lapse on Corporate Status of plaintiff or some other reason between the litigants. A Motion to Void Judgement due to lack of Jurisdiction is when the court itself never had the authority to hear the case. An example would be a credit card company suing a defendant in Small Claims Court in juriusdictions where Corporations cannot be Plaintiffs in Small Claims Court, or suing in a state where the Defendant has no nexus. I don't knwo what you mean by advantage. The two are generally mutually exclusive (meaning if you can prevail in one, you cannot prevail in the other) because a simple Motion to Vacate de facto admits the court had jurisdiction.
I see; thanks for clarifying that. I think the two were also confused by another poster sometime back, but in my situation, I was never properly served. Not only did they mail the summons, but it wasn't my residence at the time. Thanks again! __________
