Flashcards Studio

Facts: In a civil action for collection of a loan, Lender Alpha Bank obtained a final judgment against Borrower Beta Corp. after a regular hearing in Beta’s absence. Service of summons was attempted by substituted service at a private mailbox of Beta’s former officer, who no longer handles mail for the company, and Beta did not appear. Eighteen months after entry, Beta files a Petition for Relief from Judgment under Rule 47, alleging lack of jurisdiction due to defective service and claiming that the judgment is void for due process violations. Alpha Bank opposes, arguing that collateral attack is proper only for void judgments or extrinsic fraud, and that Beta should have challenged the judgment by direct post-judgment remedies (e.g., appeal or motion for relief), not by collateral attack.
(a) Identify the doctrine of collateral attack and the grounds on which it may be availed.
(b) Distinguish collateral attack from direct post-judgment remedies, and state the limits and relevant time considerations.
(c) Applying the facts, should Beta Corp. be granted relief from judgment through collateral attack? Explain your answer, focusing on lack of jurisdiction due to defective service and the effect on due process.