Fall v. Eastin
215 U.S. 1 (1909)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Fall v. Eastin, 215 U.S. 1 (1909)

Fall v. Eastin

No. 24

Submitted April 30, 1909

Decided November 1, 1909

215 U.S. 1

Syllabus

While a court of equity acting upon the person of the defendant may decree a conveyance of land in another jurisdiction and enforce the execution of the decree by process against the defendant, neither the decree, nor any conveyance under it except by the party in whom title is vested, is of any efficacy beyond the jurisdiction of the court. Corbett v. Nutt, 10 Wall. 464.

A court not having jurisdiction of the res cannot affect it by its decree nor by a deed made by a master in accordance with the decree.

Local legislation of a state as to effect of a decree, or a conveyance made by a master pursuant thereto, on the res does not apply to the operation of the decree on property situated in another state.

The full faith and credit clause of the Constitution does not extend the jurisdiction of the courts of one state to property situated in another state, but only makes the judgment conclusive on the merits of the claim or subject matter of the suit, and the courts of the state in which land is situated do not deny full faith and credit to a decree of courts of another state, or to a master's deed thereunder, by holding that it does not operate directly upon, and transfer the property.

75 Neb. 104, affirmed.

Page 215 U. S. 2

The facts are stated in the opinion.

Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.