¶1 (After stating the case as above.) The only defence made in this court is that the sums declared to be due from Claudia, are in excess of her income and largely encroach upon her principal estate. The objection interposed at this time and in this mode is entirely untenable. The judgment having been rendered by a court cf competent jurisdiction and in a cause properly constituted between 'the parties, until reversed or modified by some proceeding directly impeaching it, remains in full vigor, and its liens cannot be successfully resisted. While it stands, all inquiry .into its merits is shut off. This is fully settled upon authority and well understood principles of legal and equitable procedure. Covington v. Ingram, 64 N. C. 123; Thaxton v. Williamson, 72 N. C. 125; Spruill v. S anderson, 79 N. C. 466. We therefore affirm the judgment.
¶2 The case made out for this court contains a statement of some facts, and refers us to voluminous pleadings to ascertain the other facts therein alleged and admitted. This is ■not in accordance with the requirements of C. C. P. § 391, and but for the fact that the controversy is narrowed down to a single point, not difficult of determination, we should •have felt constrained to remand the cause at the cost of the appellant.
¶3 No error. Affirmed.