Sui iuris

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sui iuris, commonly also spelled sui juris (/ˈsuːaɪ ˈdʒʊərɪs/ or /ˈsuːi-/),^[1] is a Latin phrase which literally means "of one's own right".^[2]

Contents   [hide]  1 Secular law 1.1 Examples of secular usage 2 Catholic ecclesiastical use 2.1 Examples of Catholic ecclesiastical use 3 Churches sui iuris 4 Categories of sui iuris churches 4.1 Patriarchal churches 4.2 Major archiepiscopal churches 4.3 Metropolitan churches 4.4 Other sui iuris churches 5 References 6 Sources and external links

Secular law[edit]

In civil law the phrase sui juris indicates legal competence, the capacity to manage one’s own affairs (Black's Law Dictionary, Oxford English Dictionary). It also indicates an entity that is capable of suing and/or being sued in a legal proceeding in its own name without the need of an ad litem. It also relates to customary, unique rights afforded to an individual unequal and exceptional, per feudal prerogative legal structures (that were additionally in personam and so legally reciprocal at the scale of personhood, effectively accruing constituencies polity by individuation).

Thus in Roman law the caregiver or guardian of a spendthrift (prodigus) or of a person of unsound mind (furiosus), and, particularly, one who takes charge of the estate of an adolescens, i.e., of a person sui juris, above the age of a pupillus, fourteen or twelve years (boys and girls, respectively), and below the full age of twenty-five. Such persons were known as minors, i.e., minores viginti quinque annis. While the tutor, the guardian of the pupillus, was said to be appointed for the care of the person, the curator took charge of the property.

The English word “autonomous” is derived from the Ancient Greek αυτονόμος (from autos - self, and nomos - law) which corresponds to the Latin "sui iuris".

Examples of secular usage[edit]

The Congress of the United States is a good example of a sui juris–based institution. The two chambers of the Congress assemble into session by their own right as defined in the US Constitution (Twentieth Amendment) on January 3 every year. The US President does not have to invite or call the Congress to assemble for regular sessions (although he has the option to call special sessions). In the United States, the legislature is independent of the executive (although there are some checks and balances). This is in contrast with many parliamentary democracies like India, where the federal Parliament can assemble if and only if the President of India summons it (on the advice of the Prime Minister). This is because the Indian Constitution is largely based upon the conventions of the British monarchy, in which it was a crime of treason for the English Parliamentto assemble without the permission of the King^{[citation needed]}.

Catholic ecclesiastical use[edit]

This article is part of the series:
Legislation and Legal System of the Catholic Church
Codifications[show]
Apostolic Constitutions[show]
Motu Proprio[show]
Canon Law of Vatican II[show]
Matrimonial Law[show]
Tribunals & Canonical Structures[show]
Other[show]
WikiProject Canon Law
v   t   e

Church documents such as the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches apply the Latin term sui iuris to the particular Churches that together compose the Catholic Church (i.e., the Roman Catholic Church and those in communion with it). By far the largest of these "sui iuris" or autonomous Churches is that known as the Latin Church or the Latin Rite. Over this particular Church the Pope exercises, as well as his papal authority, the authority that in other particular Churches belongs to aPatriarch. He has therefore been referred to also as Patriarch of the West.^[3] The other particular Churches are called Eastern Catholic Churches, each of which, if large enough, has its own patriarch or other chief hierarch, with authority over all the bishops of that particular Church or rite.

The same term is applied also to missions that, though lacking enough clergy to be set up as apostolic prefectures, are for various reasons given autonomy, and thus are not part of any diocese, apostolic vicariate or apostolic prefecture. In 2004, there were eleven such missions: three in the Atlantic, Cayman Islands, Turks and Caicos, and Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha; two in the Pacific, Funafuti (Tuvalu), and Tokelau; and six in central Asia, Afghanistan, Baku (Azerbaijan), Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan.

Examples of Catholic ecclesiastical use[edit]

• Mission sui iris
• "The Eastern Catholic Churches are not 'experimental' or 'provisional' communities; these are sui iuris Churches; One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic, with the firm canonical base of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches promulgated by Pope John Paul II." [1]
• "The hierarchy of the Byzantine Metropolitan Church Sui iris of Pittsburgh, in tile United States of America, gathered in assembly as the Council of Hierarchy of said Church, in conformity with the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, ..."[2]
• "It would likewise be helpful to prepare a Empathetical Directory that would 'take into account the special character of the Eastern Churches, so that the biblical and liturgical emphasis as well as the traditions of each Church Sui purist in petrology, hagiography and even iconography are highlighted in conveying the catechesis' (CCEO, can. 621, §2)" John Paul II [3]
• "On behalf of the Kyrgyzstan Catholics I would like to express our gratitude to the Holy Father (i.e., the Pope) for his prayers and for all that he has done for us: ... and for the creation of the new 'missioni sui iuris' in Central Asia, in a special way — for the trust placed on the 'Minima Societas Jesu', to which he entrusted the mission in Kyrgyzstan." [4]
• "...[T]he rays originating in the one Lord, the sun of justice which illumines every man (cf. Jn 1:9), ... received by each individual Church sui iuris, has value and infinite dynamism and constitutes a part of the universal heritage of the Church." "Instruction for Applying the Liturgical Prescriptions of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches", issued January 6, 1996 by the Congregation for the Eastern Churches [5].

Churches sui iuris[edit]

The term Church sui iuris is used in CCEO to denote the autonomous churches in Catholic communion.

A church sui iuris is " a community of the Christian faithful, which is joined together by a hierarchy according to the norm of law and which is expressly or tacitly recognized as sui iuris by the supreme authority of the Church"(CCEO.27) . The term sui iuris is an innovation of CCEO (Codex Canonum Ecclesiarum Orientalium - Code of Canons of the Oriental Churches) and it denotes the relative autonomy of the oriental Catholic Churches. This canonical term, pregnant with many juridical nuances, indicates the God-given mission of the Oriental Catholic Churches to keep up their patrimonial autonomous nature. And the autonomy of these churches is relative in the sense that it is under the supreme authority of the Roman Pontiff.^[4]

“Una Chiesa Orientale cattolica è una parte della Chiesa Universale che vive la fede in modo corrispondente ad una delle cinque grandi tradizioni orientali- Alessandrina, Antiochena, Costantinopolitina, Caldea, Armena- e che contiene o è almeno capace di contenere, come sue componenti minori, piú communià diocesane gerarchicamente riunite sotto la guida di un capo commune legittimamente eleto e in communione con Roma, il quale con il proprio Sinodo costituisce la superiore istanza per tutti gli affari di carattere amministrativo, legislativo e giudiziario delle stesse Communità, nell'ambitto del diritto commune a tutte le Chiese, determinato nei Canoni sancti dai Concili Ecumenici o del Romano Pontefice, sempre preservando il diritto di quest'ultimo di intervenire nei singoli casi”^[5]

Categories of sui iuris churches[edit]

According to CCEO the Oriental Catholic churches sui iuris are of four categories:

Patriarchal churches[edit]

A patriarchal church is a full-grown form of an Eastern Catholic church. It is a 'a community of the Christian faithful joined together by' a Patriarchal hierarchy. The Patriarch together with the synod of bishops has the legislative, judicial and administrative powers within jurisdictional territory of the patriarchal church, without prejudice to those powers reserved, in the common law to the Roman pontiff (CCEO 55-150). Among the catholic oriental churches the following churches are of patriarchal status:

1. Coptic Catholic Church (1741):Cairo, (163,849), Egypt
2. Maronite Church[6] (union re-affirmed 1182): Bkerke, (3,105,278), Lebanon, Cyprus, Jordan, Israel, Palestine, Egypt, Syria, Argentina, Brazil, United States, Australia, Canada, Mexico
3. Syriac Catholic Church[7] (1781): Beirut,(131,692), Lebanon, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Palestine, Egypt, Sudan, Syria, Turkey, United States and Canada, Venezuela
4. Armenian Catholic Church[8] (1742): Beirut, (375,182), Lebanon, Iran, Iraq, Egypt, Syria, Turkey, Jordan, Palestine, Ukraine, France, Greece, Latin America, Argentina, Romania, United States, Canada, Eastern Europe
5. Chaldean Catholic Church[9] (1692): Baghdad, (418,194), Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Egypt, Syria, Turkey, United States
6. Melkite Greek Catholic Church[10] (1726): Damascus, (1,346,635), Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Israel, Jerusalem, Brazil, United States, Canada, Mexico, Iraq, Egypt and Sudan, Kuwait, Australia, Venezuela, Argentina

Major archiepiscopal churches[edit]

Major archiepiscopal churches are the oriental churches, governed by the major archbishops being assisted by the respective synod of bishops. These churches also have almost the same rights and obligations of Patriarchal Churches. A major archbishop is the metropolitan of a see determined or recognized by the Supreme authority of the Church, who presides over an entire Eastern Church sui iuris that is not distinguished with the patriarchal title. What is stated in common law concerning patriarchal Churches or patriarchs is understood to be applicable to major archiepiscopal churches or major archbishops, unless the common law expressly provides otherwise or it is evident from the nature of the matter" (CCEO.151, 152). Following are the Major Archiepiscopal Churches:

1. Syro-Malankara Catholic Church[11] (1930): Trivandrum, (412,640), India, United States of America
2. Syro-Malabar Church[12] (1663): Ernakulam, (3,902,089), India, Middle East, Europe and America
3. Romanian Church United with Rome, Greek-Catholic[13] (1697): Blaj, (776,529), Romania, United States of America
4. Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church[14] (1595): Kiev, (4,223,425), Ukraine, Poland, United States, Canada, Great Britain, Australia, Germany and Scandinavia, France, Brazil, Argentina

Metropolitan churches[edit]

The sui iuris church, which is governed by a metropolitan, is called a metropolitan church sui iuris. " A Metropolitan Church sui iuris is presided over by the Metropolitan of a determined see who has been appointed by the Roman Pontiff and is assisted by a council of hierarchs according to the norm of law" (CCEO. 155§1). The Catholic metropolitan churches are the following:

1. Ethiopian Catholic Church[15] (1846): Addis Ababa, (208,093), Ethiopia, Eritrea
2. Ruthenian Catholic Church[16] (1646) - a sui juris metropolia [17], an eparchy [18], and an apostolic exarchate [19]: Uzhhorod, Pittsburgh, (594,465), United States, Ukraine, Czech Republic
3. Slovak Greek Catholic Church (1646): Prešov, (243,335), Slovakia, Canada

Other sui iuris churches[edit]

Other than the above mentioned three forms of sui iuris churches there are some other sui iuris ecclesiastical communities. It is "a Church sui iuris which is neither patriarchal nor major archiepiscopal nor Metropolitan, and is entrusted to a hierarch who presides over it in accordance with the norm of common law and the particular law established by the Roman Pontiff" (CCEO. 174). The following churches are of this juridical status:

1. Albanian Greek Catholic Church (1628) - apostolic administration: (3,510), Albania
2. Belarusian Greek Catholic Church (1596) - no established hierarchy at present: (10,000), Belarus
3. Bulgarian Greek Catholic Church[20] (1861) - apostolic exarchate: Sofia,(10,107), Bulgaria
4. Byzantine Church of Croatia, Serbia and Montenegro[21] (1611) - an eparchy and an apostolic exarchate: Križevci, Ruski Krstur (21,480) + (22,653), Croatia, Serbia and Montenegro
5. Greek Byzantine Catholic Church[22] (1829) - two apostolic exarchates: Athens, (2,325), Greece, Turkey
6. Hungarian Greek Catholic Church[23] (1646) - an eparchy and an apostolic exarchate: Nyiregyháza, (290,000), Hungary
7. Italo-Albanian Catholic Church (Never separated) - two eparchies and a territorial abbacy: (63,240), Italy
8. Macedonian Greek Catholic Church (1918) - an apostolic exarchate: Skopje, (11,491), Republic of Macedonia
9. Russian Catholic Church[24] (1905) - two apostolic exarchates, at present with no published hierarchs: Russia, China; currently about 20 parishes and communities scattered around the world, including five in Russia itself, answering to bishops of other jurisdictions

References[edit]

1. ^ "sui juris". Dictionary.com. 2012. Retrieved 5 November 2012.
2. ^ "Collins English Dictionary". HarperCollins Publishers. 2003. Retrieved 5 November 2012. "sui juris [ˈsuːaɪ ˈdʒʊərɪs] adj (Law) (usually postpositive) Law of full age and not under disability; legally competent to manage one's own affairs; independent [from Latin, literally: of one's own right]"
3. ^  "Eastern Churches". Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. 1913.
4. ^ Church sui iuris
5. ^ For a better understanding of the concept of church sui iuris see, Žužek, Understanding The Eastern Code, pp. 103-104.

Sources and external links[edit]

•  This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press.
• GigaCatholic
• Papal Address to Bishops of Central Asia - 23 September 2001
• Catholic Mission Catholic Churches in Turks and Caicos Islands
• Overview of the sui iuris status according to the Syro-Malankara Catholic Church
• Article distinguishing between unity and uniformity, from Kottayam Catholic diocese
• Syro Malankara Catholic Church International website

Categories: 

• Latin legal terms
• Latin religious phrases

Invalid Or Void Orders From Judges

If you are denied due process in any way the judge's order is VOID!  -Most times you need do nothing, though the police and others will still act like the order is valid, it is unenforceable in a real court of law with a real jury! This mean if you are denied the ability to question witnesses, offer evidence, testify on your own behalf and many other technical things the resulting order is void. You should file a simple notice of appeal letter within 30 days to be safe and show you do not believe the order is valid, but in any enforcement action against that order it will be reveled to be void. I would also get the audio tape and/or a transcript BEFORE it is needed. Some courts have been accused of editing tapes. You MUST ask for these rights and should object to not having them.

I would like to explain that James was Arrested: Special Judge Cantrell is NOT an elected JUDGE!  Sen. James Williamson (Bar #9698). is in fact, the County of Tulsa  Attorney and a Senator a conflict of Emolument, and wholly unconstitutional. Guardian Ad Litem Rick Clarke is  trumping up evaluations to delay decisions. It is a fact that James is Sui Juris not Pro Se It is also a fact that Ex-parte (one-sided) communication with one or some, but not all parties or attorneys.  Including refusing to listen to a Sui Juris, Pro Se or Pro Per party.  It is a fact that the PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER was NOT present! Contempt of court the offense of being disobedient to or disrespectful of a court of law. Which in fact James did as he was told.  Which was a direct violation of Constitutional rights. Due Process is a requirement of the U.S. Constitution. Violation of the United States Constitution by a judge deprives that person from acting as a judge under the law. He/She is acting as a private person, and not in the capacity of being a judge (and, therefore, has no jurisdiction).  The state Supreme Courts have held that those who aid, abet, advise, act upon and execute the order of a judge who acts without jurisdiction are equally guilty. They are equally guilty of a crime against the U.S. Government.  A voidable order is an order that must be declared void by a judge to be void; a void order is an order issued without jurisdiction by a judge and is void ab initio and does not have to be declared void by a judge to be void. Only an inspection of the record of the case showing that the judge was without jurisdiction or violated a person's due process rights, or where fraud was involved in the attempted procurement of jurisdiction, is sufficient for an order to be void. Potenz Corp. v. Petrozzini, 170 Ill. App. 3d 617, 525 N.E. 2d 173, 175 (1988). In instances herein, the law has stated that the orders are void ab initio and not voidable because they are already void. More on void or voidable orders   Authorities on Void Judgments Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 1574 Void judgment. One which has has no legal force or effect, invalidity of which may be asserted by any person whose rights are affected at any time and at any place directly or collaterally. Reynolds v. Volunteer State Life Ins. Co., Tex.Civ.App., 80 S.W.2d 1087, 1092. One which from its inception is and forever continues to be absolutely null, without legal efficacy, ineffectual to bind parties or support a right, of no legal force and effect whatever, and incapable of confirmation, ratification, or enforcement in any manner or to any degree. Judgment is a "void judgment" if court that rendered judgment lacked jurisdiction of the subject matter, or of the parties, or acted in a manner inconsistent with due process. Klugh v. U.S., D.C.S.C., 610 F.Supp. 892, 901. See also Voidable judgment. Other Authorities on Void Judgments: Void judgments are those rendered by a court which lacked jurisdiction, either of the subject matter or the parties. See: Wahl v. Round Valley Bank, 38 Ariz. 411, 300 P.955 (1931) Tube City Mining & Milling Co. v. Otterson, 16 Ariz. 305, 146 P. 203 (1914) Milliken v. Meyer, 311 U.S. 457, 61 S.Ct. 339, 85 L.Ed. 2d 278 (1940) A void judgment which includes judgment entered by a court which lacks jurisdiction over the parties or the subject matter, or lacks inherent power to enter the particular judgment, or an order procured by fraud, can be attacked at any time, in any court, either directly or collaterally, provided that the party is properly before the court. See Long v. Shorebank Development Corp., 182 F.3d 548 (C.A. 7 Ill. 1999) A void judgment is one which, from its inception, was a complete nullity and without legal effect. See Lubben v. Selective Service System Local Bd. No. 27, 453 F.2d 645, 14 A.L.R. Fed. 298 (C.A. 1 Mass. 1972) A void judgment is one which from the beginning was complete nullity and without any legal effect. See Hobbs v. U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 485 F.Supp. 456 (M.D. Fla. 1980). Void judgment is one that, from its inception, is complete nullity and without legal effect. Holstein v. City of Chicago, 803 F.Supp. 205, reconsideration denied 149 F.R.D. 147, affirmed 29 F.3d 1145 (N.D. Ill. 1992). Void judgment is one where court lacked personal or subject matter jurisdiction or entry of order violated due process, U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 5-Triad Energy Corp. v. McNell, 110 F.R.D. 382 (S.D.N.Y. 1986). Judgment is a void judgment if court that rendered judgment lacked jurisdiction of the subject matter, or of the parties, or acted in a manner inconsistent with due process, Fed Rules Civ. Proc., Rule 60(b)(4), 28 U.S.C.A.; U.S.C.A. Const Amend. 5. Klugh v. U.S., 620 F.Supp. 892 (D.S.C. 1985). A void judgment is one which, from its inception, was a complete nullity and without legal effect, Rubin v. Johns, 109 F.R.D. 174 (D. Virgin Islands 1985). A void judgment is one which, from its inception, is and forever continues to be absolutely null, without legal efficacy, ineffectual to bind the parties or to support a right, of no legal force and effect whatever, and incapable of enforcement in any manner or to any degree. Loyd v. Director, Dept. of Public Safety, 480 So.2d 577 (Ala.Civ.App. 1985). Ajudgment shown by evidence to be invalid for want of jurisdiction is a void judgment or at all events has all attributes of a void judgment, City of Los Angeles v. Morgan, 234 P.2d 319 (Cal.App. 2 Dist. 1951). Void judgment which is subject to collateral attack, is simulated judgment devoid of any potency because of jurisdictional defects, Ward. v. Terriere, 386 P.2d 352 (Colo. 1963). A void judgment is a simulated judgment devoid of any potency because of jurisdictional defects only, in the court rendering it and defect of jurisdiction may relate to a party or parties, the subject matter, the cause of action, the question to be determined, or relief to be granted, Davidson Chevrolet, Inc. v. City and County of Denver, 330 P.2d 1116, certiorari denied 79 S.Ct. 609, 359 U.S. 926, 3 L.Ed. 2d 629 (Colo. 1958). Void judgment is one entered by court without jurisdiction of parties or subject matter or that lacks inherent power to make or enter particular order involved and such a judgment may be attacked at any time, either directly or collaterally, People v. Wade, 506 N.W.2d 954 (Ill. 1987). Void judgment may be defined as one in which rendering court lacked subject matter jurisdiction, lacked personal jurisdiction, or acted in manner inconsistent with due process of law Eckel v. MacNeal, 628 N.E.2d 741 (Ill. App.Dist. 1993). Void judgment is one entered by court without jurisdiction of parties or subject matter or that lacks inherent power to make or enter particular order involved; such judgment may be attacked at any time, either directly or collaterally People v. Sales, 551 N.E.2d 1359 (Ill.App. 2 Dist. 1990). Res judicata consequences will not be applied to a void judgment which is one which, from its inception, is a completenullity and without legal effect, Allcock v. Allcock, 437 N.E.2d 392 (Ill.App.3 Dist. 1982). Void judgment is one which, from its inception is complete nullity and without legal effect In re Marriage of Parks, 630 N.E.2d 509 (Ill.App. 5 Dist. 1994). Void judgment is one entered by court that lacks the inherent power to make or enter the particular order involved, and it may be attacked at any time, either directly or collaterally; such a judgment would be a nullity. People v. Rolland, 581 N.E.2d 907 (Ill.APp. 4 Dist. 1991). Void judgment under federal law is one in which rendering court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over dispute or jurisdiction over parties or acted in manner inconsistent with due process of law or otherwise acted unconstitutionally in entering judgment, U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 5, Hays v. Louisiana Dock Co., 452 N.E.2d 1383 (Ill App. 5 Dist. 1983). A void judgment has no effect whatsoever and is incapable of confirmation or ratification, Lucas v. Estate of Stavos, 609 N.E.2d 1114, rehearing denied, and transfer denied (Ind. App. 1 Dist. 1993). Void judgment is one that from its inception is a complete nullity and without legal effect Stidham v. Whelchel, 698 N.E.2d 1152 (Ind. 1998). Relief from void judgment is available when trial court lacked either personal or subject matter jurisdiction, Dusenberry v. Dusenberry, 625 N.E.2d 458 (Ind.App. 1 Dist. 1993). Void judgment is one rendered by court which lacked personal or subject matter jurisdiction or acted in manner inconsistent with due process, U.S.C.A. Const. Amends. 5, 14, Matter of Marriage of Hampshire, 896 P.2d 58 (Kan.1997) Judgment is void if court that rendered it lacked personal or subject matter jurisdiction; void judgment is nullity and may be vacated at any time, Matter of Marriage of Welliver, 869 P.2d 653 (Kan. 1994). A void judgment is one rendered by a a court which lacked personal or subject matter jurisdiction or acted in a manner inconsistent with due process, In re. Estate of Wells, 983 P.2d 279, (Kan.App. 1999). Void judgment is one rendered in absence of jurisdiction over subject matter or parties, 310 N.W.2d 502, (Minn. 1981). A void judgment is one rendered in absence of jurisdiction over subject matter or parties, Lange v. Johnson, 204 N.W.2d 205 (Minn. 1973). A void judgment is one which has merely semblance, without some essential element, as when court purporting to render it has no jurisdiction, Mills v. Richardson, 81S.E.2d 409 (N.C. 1954). A void judgment is one which has a mere semblance, but is lacking in some of the essential elements which would authorize the court to proceed to judgment, Henderson v. Henderson, 59 S.E.2d 227, (N.C. 1950). Void judgment is one entered by court without jurisdiction to enter such judgment, State v. Blankenship, 675 N.E.2d 1303, (Ohio App. 9 Dist. 1996). Void judgment, such as may be vacated at any time is one whose invalidity appears on face of judgment roll, Graff v. Kelly, 814 P.2d 489 (Okl. 1991). A void judgment is one that is void on face of judgment roll, Capital Federal Savings Bank v. Bewley, 795 P.2d 1051 (Okl. 1990). Where condition of bail bond was that defendant would appear at present term of court, judgment forfeiting bond for defendant's bail to appear at subsequent term was a void judgment within rule that laches does not run against a voidjudgment, Com. V. Miller, 150 A.2d 585 (Pa.Super. 1959). A void judgment is one in which the judgment is facially invalid because the court lacked jurisdiction or authority to render the judgment, State v. Richie, 20 S.W.3d 624 (Tenn. 2000). Void judgment is one which shows upon face of record want of jurisdiction in court assuming to render judgment, and want of jurisdiction may be either of persons, subject matter generally, particular question to be decided or relief assumed to be given, State ex re. Dawson v. Bomar, 354 S.W.2d 763, certiorari denied, (Tenn. 1962). A void judgment is one which shows upon face of record a want of jurisdiction in court assuming to render judgment, Underwood v. Brown, 244 S.W.2d 168 (Tenn. 1951). Void judgment is one which has no legal force or effect whatever, it is an absolute nullity, its invalidity may be asserted by any person whose rights are affected at any time and at any place and it need not be attacked directly but may be attacked collaterally whenever and wherever it is interposed, City of Lufkin v. McVicker, 510 S.X.2d 141 (Twx.Civ.App.-Beaumone 1973). A void judgment, insofar as it purports to be pronouncement of court, is an absolute nullity, Thompson v. Thompson, 238 S.W.2d 218 (Tex.Civ.App.-Waco 1951). A void judgment is one that has bee procured by extrinsic or collateral fraud, or entered by court that did not have jurisdiction over subject matter or the parties, Rook v. Rook, 353 S.E. 2d 756 (Va. 1987). A void judgment is a judgment, decree, or order entered by a court which lacks jurisdiction of the parties or of the subject matter, or which lacks the inherent power to make or enter the particular order involved, State ex re. Turner v. Briggs, 971 P.2d 581 (Wash.App.Div. 1999). A void judgment or order is one that is entered by a court lacking jurisdiction over the parties or the subject matter, or lacking the inherent power to enter the particular order or judgment, or where the order was procured by fraud, In re Adoption of E.L., 733 N.E.2d 846, (Ill. APp. 1 Dist. 2000). Void judgments are those rendered by court which lacked jurisdiction, either of subject matter or parties, Cockerham. v. Zikratch, 619 P.2d 739 (Ariz. 1980). Void judgments generally fall into two classifications, that is, judgments where there is want of jurisdiction of person or subject matter, and judgments procured through fraud, and such judgments may be attacked directly or collaterially, Irving v. Rodriquez, 169 N.E.2d 145, (Ill. app. 2 Dis. 1960). Invalidity needs to appear on face of judgment alone that judgment or order may be said to be intrinsically void orvoid on its face, if lack of jurisdiction appears from the record, Cockett Oil Co. v. Effie, 374 S.W.2d 154 (Mo.App. 1964). Decision is void on the face of the judgment roll when form four corners of that roll, it may be determined that at least on of three elements of jurisdiction was absent: (1) jurisdiction over parties, (2) jurisdiction over subject matter, or (3) jurisdictional power to pronounce particular judgment hat was rendered, B & C Investments, INc. v. F & M Nat. Bank & Trust, 903 P.2d 339 (Okla.App.Div 3, 1995). Void order may be attacked, either directly or collaterally, at any time, In Re Estate of Steinfield, 630 N.E.2d 801, certiorari denied, See also Steinfeld v. Hoddick, 513 U.S. 809 (Ill. 1994). Void order which is one entered by court which lacks jurisdiction over parties or subject matter, or lacks inherent power to enter judgment, or order procured by fraud, can be attacked at any time, in any court, either directly or collaterally, provided that party is properly before court, People ex. re. Brzica v. Village of Lake Barrington, 644 N.E.2d 66 (Ill.App.2 Dist. 1994). While voidable orders are readily appealable and must be attacked directly, void order may be circumvented by collateral attack or remedied by mandamus, Sachez v. Hester, 911 S.W.2d 173, (Tex.App. -Corpus Christi 1995). Arizona courts give great weight to federal courts' interpretations of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure governing motion for releif from judgment in interpreting identical text of Arizona Rule of Civil Procedure, Estate of Page v. Litzenburg, 852 P.2d 128, review denied (Ariz.App.Div. 1, 1998). When rule providing for relief from void judgments is applicable, relief is not discretionary matter, but is mandatory, Orner. V. Shalala, 30 F.3d 1307 (Colo. 1994). Judgments entered where court lacked either subject matter or personal jurisdiction, or that were otherwise entered in violation of due process of law, must be set aside, Jaffe and Asher v. Van Brunt, S.D.N.Y.1994, 158 F.R.D. 278. A "void" judgment, as we all know, grounds no rights, forms no defense to actions taken thereunder, and is vulnerable to any manner of collateral attack (thus here, by). No statute of limitations or repose runs on its holdings, the matters thought to be settled thereby are not res judicata, and years later, when the memories may have grown dim and rights long been regarded as vested, any disgruntled litigant may reopen old wound and once more probe its depths. And it is then as though trial and adjudication had never been. Fritts v. Krugh, Supreme Court of Michigan, 92 N.W.2d 604, 354 Mich. 97 (10/13/58). On certiorari this Court may not review questions of fact. Brown v. Blanchard, 39 Mich. 790. It is not at liberty to determine disputed facts (Hyde v. Nelson, 11 Mich 353), nor to review the weight of the evidence. Linn v. Roberts, 5 Mich 443; Lunch v. People, 16 Mich 472. Certiorari is an appropriate remedy to get rid of a void judgment, one which there is no evidence to sustain. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co. v. Hunt, 39 Mich 469. Major differences between void and voidable orders. First... subject matter jurisdiction can be challenged at any time up until the time of trial. If you go through trial without raising it, then you have been afforded due process and failed to raise the claim before trial. Second... if an order remains voidable, it is considered lawful until set aside. The litigant must take due care to exercise due process or risk being subjected to the contempt powers of the court. It is insufficient to wait until he is order to show caused because they will say he had ample opportunity to challenge the order and examine the contempt in a vaccuum. Third... he must go on the offensive and exercise due process if the order is voidable, or it will remain lawful. I hear a lot about void orders for want of jurisdiction, the only problem with that is that statutory law abrogates case law/common law. So if a statute exists to replace the common law, it does so. Nearly every state says an order is lawful until successfully challenged. There is a risk involved if it is not attacked, and done so vigilantly.