This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Durfee (D) brought an action against Duke (P) in a Nebraska court to quiet title to land situated on the Missouri River. Nebraska had subject matter jurisdiction only if the land was in Nebraska; the factual issue was whether a shift in the river's course had been caused by avulsion or accretion. P appeared in the Nebraska court and litigated the issues, including the court's jurisdiction. The trial and appellate courts found for D and held that the Nebraska court had subject matter jurisdiction based on their finding that the land was in Nebraska. P then sued in a Missouri court to quiet title on the same land. Because of diversity of citizenship, the action was removed to the federal district court. That court held that, although the disputed land was in Missouri since the Nebraska litigation had adjudicated and determined all the issues, the judgment of the Nebraska court was res judicata and binding. P argued that the Nebraska judgment was not conclusive on the merits in the Missouri court since Nebraska had no jurisdiction over Missouri land. The appellate court reversed, holding that the court was not obliged to give full faith and credit to the Nebraska judgment and that res judicata was inapplicable because the controversy involved land and the Missouri court was therefore free to retry the issue of the Nebraska court's jurisdiction over the subject matter.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.