Summary

Portrait of Stanley Forman Reed Stanley Forman Reed Stoll v. Gottlieb — Opinion of the Court

Courts to determine the rights of parties are an integral part of our system of government. It is just as important that there should be a place to end as that there should be a place to begin litigation. After a party has his day in court, with opportunity to present his evidence and his view of the law, a collateral attack upon the decision as to jurisdiction there rendered merely retries the issue previously determined. There is no reason to expect that the second decision will be more satisfactory than the first.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Stanley Forman Reed Stanley Forman Reed Stoll v. Gottlieb — Opinion of the Court

After a Federal court has decided the question of the jurisdiction over the parties as a contested issue, the court in which the plea of res judicata is made has not the power to inquire again into that jurisdictional fact. [13] We see no reason why a court in the absence of an allegation of fraud in obtaining the judgment, should examine again the question whether the court [14] making the earlier determination on an actual contest over jurisdiction between the parties, did have jurisdiction of the subject matter of the litigation.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Stanley Forman Reed Stanley Forman Reed Stoll v. Gottlieb — Opinion of the Court

The records and judicial proceedings of the courts of any State or Territory, or of any such country, shall be proved or admitted in any other court within the United States, by the attestation of the clerk, and the seal of the court annexed, if there be a seal, together with a certificate of the judge, chief justice, or presiding magistrate, that the said attestation is in due form.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature