Cited by

A judgment is void if the court lacked jurisdiction to render a judgment “over the subject matter, over the person, 3 MOHAVE v. MESSNER Decision of the Court or over the particular judgment or order entered.” Master Fin., ¶ 19 (App. 2004) (citation omitted); ¶ 10 (App. 2018) (“Proper service is essential for the court to have jurisdiction over the defendant.”).

Master Fin., ¶ 19 (App. 2004) (explaining a court “must vacate” a void judgment).

B. Void for Lack of Jurisdiction ¶18 Under Rule 60(b)(4), a “court may relieve a party or its legal representative from a final judgment” when “the judgment is void.” “A judgment or order is void if the court lacked jurisdiction over the subject matter, over the person, or over the particular judgment or order entered.” Master Fin., ¶ 19 (App. 2004).

Master Financial, ¶19 (App. 2004).

See Master Financial, ¶ 19 (App. 2004) (a “judgment or order is void if the court lacked jurisdiction over the subject matter, over the person, or over the particular judgment or order entered”).

An “order is void if the court lacked jurisdiction over the 3 COTA v. KEENE Decision of the Court subject matter, over the person, or over the particular judgment or order entered.” Master Fin., ¶ 19 (App. 2004).

The moving party must show “facts sufficient to demonstrate that the neglect is excusable, not merely unexplained.” Master Fin., ¶ 18 (App. 2004).

¶ 19 (App. 2010) (); see also Master Fin., ¶ 19 (App. 2004) (“A judgment or order is void if the court lacked jurisdiction over the subject matter, over the person, or over the particular judgment or order entered.”).

Master Fin., ¶ 19 (App. 2004).

Master Financial, ¶ 18 (App. 2004).

Master Fin., Inc. v. Woodburn , , 73, ¶ 15, , 1239 (App. 2004) (citing Mullane v. Cent.

Master Fin., ¶ 19 (App. 2004).

See Master Fin., ¶ 19 (App. 2004).

Laches of a party cannot cure a judgment that is so defective as to be void; laches cannot infuse the judgment with life.”) (quoting 7 Moore’s Federal Practice § 60.25(4) (2d ed. 1955)) (emphasis added); Master Fin., ¶ 19 (App. 2004) (motion to vacate void judgment is never untimely, “even in the case of unreasonable delay by the party seeking relief”); (holding that time does not limit court’s duty to vacate a void judgment even when the party seeking relief delayed unreasonably

3 PALISADES v. ROBERTO, ¶ 19 (App. 2004) (lack of personal jurisdiction over defendants renders judgment void).

See Master Financial, ¶ 19, (stating the court must vacate a void judgment under Rule 60(c)(4)).

¶ 19, (noting that the lack of personal jurisdiction over a defendant renders any judgment void).

See, e.g., Master Fin., ¶ 18, (“[A] defendant must allege facts sufficient to demonstrate that the neglect is excusable, not merely unexplained.”).

[and] a party seeking relief from a void judgment need not show that their failure to file a timely answer was excusable, that they acted promptly ..., or that they had a meritorious defense.” Master Fin.

See Master Fin., ¶ 1 , (holding that service by publication satisfies due process principles when a plaintiff pursuing a money judgment against a defendant whose residence is unknown but whose last known residence was within the state serves by publication in accordance with Rule 4.1(n)).

-23 , -92 (1963)(court lacked jurisdiction to enter default judgment following service by publication based on alleged lack of knowledge of defendants’ residences when simple inquiry would have revealed information); Master Fin., ¶15 , (service by publication satisfies due-process minimum notice requirements if “it is the best means of notice under the circumstances and it is reasonably calculated to apprise the interested parties of the pendency of the action.”); Cooper v. Commonwealth Title of