Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A principle that a court's judgment or decree becomes conclusive and binding upon entry. The principle limits reopening or revision except through appeal or narrowly defined post-judgment motions. It promotes reliance on judicial outcomes and prevents endless relitigation.
Sources & Authorities
How it applies
Common Examples
6
Divorce Decree Allows Remarriage
Diana Delgado obtained a dissolution decree stating that her marriage to Derek Douglas was irretrievably broken. Derek appealed only the property division and did not contest the dissolution finding. Diana remarried six weeks later because the decree dissolving the marriage became final upon entry despite the pending appeal.
State Decree Binds Federal Tax Court
Darius Dixon's estate obtained a state-court ruling on the validity of a marital deduction. The IRS challenged the ruling in federal tax proceedings. The court treated the state decree as final and conclusive on the underlying state-law issue.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Cases
Statutes
Federal Rules
Uniform Acts
Model Codes
Restatements
Study Supplements
Dictionaries
Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Estate of Bosch387 U.S. 456, 465 (1967)
Notice Requirement Protects Finality
Destiny Davis received notice of a trust accounting proceeding only by publication. She later sought to reopen the final settlement order. The court held that due process required adequate notice before the decree could bind absent beneficiaries.
Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank and Trust Co.339 U.S. 306, 313-314 (1950)
Legislature Cannot Reopen Final Judgment
Dorothy Daniels obtained a final federal judgment dismissing a consumer class action. Congress then passed a statute directing courts to reopen all such judgments and recompute damages. The court refused to apply the statute because it violated the finality of the existing judgment.
Baker v. Carr369 U.S. 186, 211
Administrative Decision Gains Finality
Dustin Donovan received a final agency determination on contract claims against the government. He sought de novo review in district court. The court held that the administrative decision carried finality and limited judicial review to the administrative record.
Crowell v. Benson285 U.S. 22 (1932)
Habeas Review Does Not Undo Finality
Dominion Capital was convicted and the conviction became final after direct appeal. The company later sought federal habeas relief on a Fourth Amendment claim. The court held that the doctrine of finality barred relitigation of the claim absent extraordinary circumstances.
Stone v. Powell428 U.S. 465 (1976)
Common questions
Frequently Asked
4
When does a dissolution decree become final under the Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act?+
A decree of dissolution is final when entered, subject only to the right of appeal. An appeal that does not challenge the finding that the marriage is irretrievably broken does not delay finality of the dissolution provision itself. Either party may therefore remarry while the appeal is pending.
Supporting sources
Does a Rule 60 motion affect the finality of a judgment?+
A motion for relief from judgment does not affect the judgment's finality or suspend its operation. The judgment remains enforceable and appealable while the motion is pending.
Supporting sources
May Congress direct courts to reopen final judgments?+
Congress may not require federal courts to reopen cases in which final judgments have already been entered. Such legislation violates separation of powers because final judgments represent the conclusive exercise of judicial power.
Supporting sources
How does the doctrine of finality interact with statutory redemption after foreclosure?+
A foreclosure purchaser takes title subject to any statutory right of redemption that exists for a fixed period after the sale. Once that period expires without redemption, the purchaser's title becomes absolute and final.
Supporting sources
424 U.S. 319 (1976)Constitutional Law
…of his benefits, yet failed even to seek reconsideration of the initial determination. Since the Secretary has not "waived" the finality requirement as he had in Salfi, supra , at 767, he concludes that Eldridge cannot properly invoke § 405 (g) as a basis for jurisdiction. We disagree. Salfi identified several conditions…