Rosenstone v. Johnston

Summary

The Florida Supreme Court reviewed an order sustaining a demurrer to a bill seeking to declare an unlawful detainer judgment void and obtain equitable relief. The court held that the judgment was not void merely because the defendant was a married woman, where she had been sued as if unmarried and had previously been adjudicated a free dealer. The court also held that alleged errors in pleading or proof should have been raised in the original action or on writ of error, rather than through an equitable action to enjoin the judgment, and affirmed.

Holdings

1. The judgment was not void on that ground. Because Rosenstone was sued as if she were unmarried, the complaint was not required to allege removal of the disabilities of coverture; such an allegation would have been necessary only if she had been sued as a married woman.
2. Equity will not intervene to enjoin a judgment rendered by a court of competent jurisdiction that acquired jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter, when no fraud is charged and the complainant had an opportunity to defend.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the unlawful-detainer judgment was void because the complaint did not allege that Rosenstone, a married woman, had been adjudicated a free dealer.
2. Whether equity could invalidate or enjoin enforcement of the prior judgment based on the asserted unavailability of unlawful detainer or alleged defects in the prior pleading or proof.
3. Whether the circuit court properly sustained the demurrer to the bill of complaint.

Disposition

affirmed