text:
In March 2017, Dr Dubal joined the School of Chemical Engineering of the University of Adelaide (UoA) as a "Research for Impact Fellow". He is previous recipient of two most prestigious fellowships: Marie-Curie at ICN2, Spain and Alexander von Humboldt at TUC, Germany. Dr. Dubal has co-authored more than 148 research articles including Chem. Soc. Rev., Adv. Mater., Nano Energy, NPG Asia Materials, 2D Materials, Journal of Materials Chemistry A, ChemSusChem etc. and achieved over 7000 citations, 'h' index: 46 and 'i10' index 106 (Google Scholar). He has edited one book, contributed several book chapters and filed seven patents including five Indian, one European and one Spanish. His research interest is focused on development of advanced functional materials and nanocomposites, new oxides, polyoxometalates, and polymers for energy storage devices with special emphasis on Li-ion batteries, beyond Li-ion batteries, Supercapacitors, Electrochemical Flow Cells and hybrid Li-capacitor. He is a member of the Editorial board of Scientific Reports, Nature Publishing Group and Electrochemical Energy Technology from De Gruyder publications, Germany.
2008 - 2011 Shivaji University, Kolhāpur India Ph.D.
2019 Chodankar, N., Dubal, D., Ji, S., & Kim, D. (2019). Highly efficient and stable negative electrode for asymmetric supercapacitors based on graphene/FeCo₂/O₄ nanocomposite hybrid material. Electrochimica Acta, 295, 195-203.
2019 Dubal, D., Chodankar, N., & Qiao, S. (2019). Tungsten nitride nanodots embedded phosphorous modified carbon fabric as flexible and robust electrode for asymmetric pseudocapacitor. Small, 15(1), 1804104-1-1804104-9.
2018 Dubal, D., Jagadale, A., Chodankar, N., Kim, D., Gomez-Romero, P., & Holze, R. (2018). Polypyrrole Nanopipes as a Promising Cathode Material for Li-ion Batteries and Li-ion Capacitors: Two-in-One Approach. Energy Technology.
2018 Dubal, D., Chodankar, N., Kim, D. -H., & Gomez-Romero, P. (2018). Towards flexible solid-state supercapacitors for smart and wearable electronics. Chemical Society Reviews, 47(6), 2065-2129.
2018 Dubal, D., Rueda-Garcia, D., Marchante, C., Benages, R., & Gomez-Romero, P. (2018). Hybrid Graphene-Polyoxometalates Nanofluids as Liquid Electrodes for Dual Energy Storage in Novel Flow Cells. Chemical Record, 18(7), 1-10.
2018 Jayaramulu, K., Dubal, D., Nagar, B., Ranc, V., Tomanec, O., Petr, M., . . . Fischer, R. (2018). Ultrathin Hierarchical Porous Carbon Nanosheets for High-Performance Supercapacitors and Redox Electrolyte Energy Storage. Advanced Materials, 30(15), 1-9.
2018 Dubal, D., & Gomez-Romero, P. (2018). All nanocarbon Li-Ion capacitor with high energy and high power density. Materials Today Energy, 8, 109-117.
2018 Dubal, D., Jayaramulu, K., Zboril, R., Fischer, R., & Gomez-Romero, P. (2018). Unveiling BiVO(4) nanorods as a novel anode material for high performance lithium ion capacitors: Beyond intercalation strategies. Journal of Materials Chemistry A, 6(14), 6096-6106.
2018 Lima, G., Dubal, D., Rueda-García, D., Gómez-Romero, P., & Huguenin, F. (2018). Energy harvesting from neutralization reactions with saline feedback. Electrochimica Acta, 275, 145-154.
2018 Nagar, B., Dubal, D., Pires, L., Merkoçi, A., & Gómez-Romero, P. (2018). Design and fabrication of printed paper-based hybrid micro-supercapacitor by using graphene and redox-active electrolyte. ChemSusChem, 11(11), 1849-1856.
2018 Chodankar, N., Dubal, D., Ji, S., & Kim, D. (2018). Superfast Electrodeposition of Newly Developed RuCo2O4 Nanobelts over Low-Cost Stainless Steel Mesh for High-Performance Aqueous Supercapacitor. Advanced Materials Interfaces, 5(15), 11 pages.
2018 Rueda-Garcia, D., Cabán-Huertas, Z., Sánchez-Ribot, S., Marchante, C., Benages, R., Dubal, D., . . . Gómez-Romero, P. (2018). Battery and supercapacitor materials in flow cells. Electrochemical energy storage in a LiFePO4/reduced graphene oxide aqueous nanofluid. Electrochimica Acta, 281, 594-600.
2017 Pandit, B., Dubal, D., Gómez-Romero, P., Kale, B., & Sankapal, B. (2017). V2O5 encapsulated MWCNTs in 2D surface architecture: Complete solid-state bendable highly stabilized energy efficient supercapacitor device. Scientific Reports, 7(1), 1-12.
2017 Rueda-García, D., Dubal, D., Hugenin, F., & Gómez-Romero, P. (2017). Hurdles to organic quinone flow cells. Electrode passivation by quinone reduction in acetonitrile Li electrolytes. Journal of Power Sources, 350, 9-17.
2017 Shinde, S., Ghodake, G., Dubal, D., Patel, R., Saratale, R., Kim, D., . . . Fulari, V. (2017). Electrochemical synthesis: monoclinic Cu₂Se nano-dendrites with high performance for supercapacitors. Journal of the Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers, 75, 271-279.
2017 Tajik, S., Dubal, D., Gomez-Romero, P., Yadegari, A., Rashidi, A., Nasernejad, B., . . . Asiri, A. (2017). Nanostructured mixed transition metal oxides for high performance asymmetric supercapacitors: facile synthetic strategy. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 42(17), 12384-12395.
2017 Dubal, D., Nagar, B., Suarez-Guevara, J., Tonti, D., Enciso, E., Palomino, P., & Gomez-Romero, P. (2017). Ultrahigh energy density supercapacitors through a double hybrid strategy. Materials Today Energy, 5, 58-65.
2017 Pandit, B., Dubal, D., & Sankapal, B. (2017). Large scale flexible solid state symmetric supercapacitor through inexpensive solution processed V₂O₅ complex surface architecture. Electrochimica Acta, 242, 382-389.
2017 Wolfart, F., Hryniewicz, B., Marchesi, L., Orth, E., Dubal, D., Gómez-Romero, P., & Vidotti, M. (2017). Direct electrodeposition of imidazole modified poly(pyrrole) copolymers: synthesis, characterization and supercapacitive properties. Electrochimica Acta, 243, 260-269.
2017 Dubal, D., Chodankar, N., Vinu, A., Kim, D., & Gomez-Romero, P. (2017). Asymmetric supercapacitors based on reduced graphene oxide with different polyoxometalates as positive and negative electrodes. ChemSusChem, 10(13), 2742-2750.
2017 Dubal, D., & Holze, R. (2017). Editorial. Journal of Solid State Electrochemistry, 21(9), 2463-2465.
2017 Chodankar, N., Dubal, D., Kwon, Y., & Kim, D. -H. (2017). Direct growth of FeCo2O4 nanowire arrays on flexible stainless steel mesh for high-performance asymmetric supercapacitor. NPG ASIA MATERIALS, 9(8), 1-10.
2017 Gaikar, P., Navale, S., Jadhav, V., Shinde, P., Dubal, D., Arjunwadkar, P., . . . Mane, R. (2017). A simple wet-chemical synthesis, reaction mechanism, and charge storage application of cobalt oxide electrodes of different morphologies. Electrochimica Acta, 253, 151-162.
2017 Dubal, D., Patil, D., Patil, S., Munirathnam, N., & Gomez-Romero, P. (2017). BiVO₄ fern architectures: a competitive anode for lithium-ion batteries. ChemSusChem, 10(21), 4163-4169.
2017 Karade, S., Dubal, D., & Sankapal, B. (2017). Decoration of ultrathin MoS₂ nanoflakes over MWCNTs: enhanced supercapacitive performance through electrode to symmetric all-solid-state device. ChemistrySelect, 2(32), 10405-10412.
2017 Dubal, D., Chodankar, N., Holze, R., Kim, D., & Gomez-Romero, P. (2017). Ultrathin Mesoporous RuCo2O4 Nanoflakes: An Advanced Electrode for High-Performance Asymmetric Supercapacitors. ChemSusChem, 10(8), 1771-1782.
2017 Dhaygude, H., Shinde, S., Dubal, D., Velhal, N., Kim, D., & Fulari, V. (2017). Structural, optical, and photoelectrochemical properties of nanosphere-like CdXZn1-XS synthesized by electrochemical route. Ionics, 23(1), 223-231.
2017 Tamboli, M., Dubal, D., Patil, S., Shaikh, A., Deonikar, V., Kulkarni, M., . . . Patil, D. (2017). Mimics of microstructures of Ni substituted Mn1- xNixCo2O4 for high energy density asymmetric capacitors. Chemical Engineering Journal, 307, 300-310.
2017 Dubal, D., Ballesteros, B., Mohite, A., & Gómez-Romero, P. (2017). Functionalization of Polypyrrole Nanopipes with Redox-Active Polyoxometalates for High Energy Density Supercapacitors. ChemSusChem, 10(4), 731-737.
2017 Shinde, S., Ghodake, G., Dubal, D., Dhaygude, H., Kim, D., & Fulari, V. (2017). Enhanced photoelectrochemical properties of nanoflower-like hexagonal CdSe₀.₆Te₀.₄: effect of electron beam irradiation. Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, 45, 92-98.
2017 Shinde, S., Ghodake, G., Dubal, D., Dhaygude, H., Kim, D., Rath, M., & Fulari, V. (2017). Morphological modification of CdSe0.6Te0.4 nanostructures by electron irradiation and the effect on photoelectrochemical cells. Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics, 28(2), 1976-1984.
2017 Palomino, P., Suarez-Guevara, J., Olivares-Marín, M., Ruiz, V., Dubal, D., Gómez-Romero, P., . . . Enciso, E. (2017). Influence of texture in hybrid carbon-phosphomolybdic acid materials on their performance as electrodes in supercapacitors. Carbon, 111, 74-82.
2016 Sankapal, B., Salunkhe, D., Majumder, S., & Dubal, D. (2016). Solution-processed CdS quantum dots on TiO2: light-induced electrochemical properties. RSC Advances, 6(86), 83175-83184.
2016 Dubal, D., & Gomez-Romero, P. (2016). Electroactive graphene nanofluids for fast energy storage. 2D Materials, 3(3), 031004-1-031004-5.
2016 Patil, S., Dubal, D., Deonikar, V., Tamboli, M., Ambekar, J., Gomez-Romero, P., . . . Patil, D. (2016). Fern-like rGO/BiVO₄ hybrid nanostructures for high-energy symmetric supercapacitor. ACS Applied Materials and Interfaces, 8(46), 31602-31610.
2016 Kamble, S., Sikora, A., Deshmukh, S., Pawar, S., Chavan, G., Dubal, D., . . . Deshmukh, L. (2016). The optical and electrical transport studies of ZnxCo1- xS thin films. Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics, 27(12), 12302-12311.
2016 Wolfart, F., Dubal, D., Vidotti, M., Holze, R., & Gómez-Romero, P. (2016). Electrochemical supercapacitive properties of polypyrrole thin films: influence of the electropolymerization methods. Journal of Solid State Electrochemistry, 20(4), 901-910.
2016 Patil, S., Jadhav, L., Dubal, D., & Puri, V. (2016). Characterization of NiO-Al₂O₃ composite and its conductivity in biogas for solid oxide fuel cell. Materials Science- Poland, 34(2), 266-274.
2016 Cabán-Huertas, Z., Ayyad, O., Dubal, D., & Gómez-Romero, P. (2016). Aqueous synthesis of LiFePO₄ with Fractal Granularity. Scientific Reports, 6(1), 27024-1-27024-9.
2016 Karade, S., Dubal, D., & Sankapal, B. (2016). MoS2 ultrathin nanoflakes for high performance supercapacitors: room temperature chemical bath deposition (CBD). RSC Advances, 6(45), 39159-39165.
2016 Patil, S., Dubal, D., Tamboli, M., Ambekar, J., Kolekar, S., Gomez-Romero, P., . . . Patil, D. (2016). Ag:BiVO₄ dendritic hybrid-architecture for high energy density symmetric supercapacitors. Journal of Materials Chemistry A, 4(20), 7580-7584.
2016 Dhaygude, H., Shinde, S., Dubal, D., Rath, M., & Fulari, V. (2016). Effect of electron beam irradiation on electro synthesized hexagonal Cd₀.₃Zn₀.₇S nanosphere with excellent application in solar cell. Applied Surface Science, 368, 1-7.
2016 Sankapal, B., Gajare, H., Karade, S., Salunkhe, R., & Dubal, D. (2016). Zinc Oxide Encapsulated Carbon Nanotube Thin Films for Energy Storage Applications. Electrochimica Acta, 192, 377-384.
2016 Shinde, S., Dubal, D., Ghodake, G., Kim, D., & Fulari, V. (2016). Morphological tuning of CuO nanostructures by simple preparative parameters in SILAR method and their consequent effect on supercapacitors. Nano-Structures and Nano-Objects, 6, 5-13.
2016 Chodankar, N., Dubal, D., Gund, G., & Lokhande, C. (2016). A symmetric MnO₂/MnO₂ flexible solid state supercapacitor operating at 1.6v with aqueous gel electrolyte. Journal of Energy Chemistry, 25(3), 463-471.
2016 Wolfart, F., Dubal, D., Vidotti, M., & Gómez-Romero, P. (2016). Hybrid core-shell nanostructured electrodes made of polypyrrole nanotubes coated with Ni(OH)₂ nanoflakes for high energy-density supercapacitors. RSC Advances, 6(18), 15062-15070.
2016 Dhaygude, H., Shinde, S., Takale, M., Dubal, D., Lohar, G., & Fulari, V. (2016). Electrodeposited nanosphere like Cd x Zn1- x S electrodes for photoelectrochemical cell. Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics, 27(5), 5145-5152.
2016 Dubal, D., Chodankar, N., Caban-Huertas, Z., Wolfart, F., Vidotti, M., Holze, R., . . . Gomez-Romero, P. (2016). Synthetic approach from polypyrrole nanotubes to nitrogen doped pyrolyzed carbon nanotubes for asymmetric supercapacitors. Journal of Power Sources, 308, 158-165.
2016 Baviskar, P., Dubal, D., Majumder, S., Ennaoui, A., & Sankapal, B. (2016). "Basic idea, advance approach": Efficiency boost by sensitization of blended dye on chemically deposited ZnO films. Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology A: Chemistry, 318, 135-141.
2016 Dubal, D., Caban-Huertas, Z., Holze, R., & Gomez-Romero, P. (2016). Growth of polypyrrole nanostructures through reactive templates for energy storage applications. Electrochimica Acta, 191, 346-354.
2016 Kamble, S., Dubal, D., Tarwal, N., Sikora, A., Jang, J., & Deshmukh, L. (2016). Studies on the ZnₓCo₁-ₓS thin films: a facile synthesis process and characteristic properties. Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 656, 590-597.
2016 Chodankar, N., Dubal, D., Lokhande, A., Patil, A., Kim, J., & Lokhande, C. (2016). An innovative concept of use of redox-active electrolyte in asymmetric capacitor based on MWCNTs/MnO₂ and Fe₂O₃ thin films. Scientific Reports, 6(1), 39205-1-39205-14.
2016 Gawali, S., Dubal, D., Deonikar, V., Patil, S., Patil, S., Gomez-Romero, P., . . . Pant, J. (2016). Asymmetric supercapacitor based on nanostructured Ce-doped NiO (Ce:NiO) as positive and reduced graphene Oxide (rGO) as negative electrode. ChemistrySelect, 1(13), 3471-3478.
2016 Dubal, D., Wu, Y., & Holze, R. (2016). Supercapacitors: from the Leyden jar to electric busses. ChemTexts, 2(3), 1-19.
2015 Dubal, D., Chodankar, N., Gund, G., Holze, R., Lokhande, C., & Gomez-Romero, P. (2015). Asymmetric supercapacitors based on hybrid CuO@reduced graphene oxide@sponge versus reduced graphene oxide@sponge electrodes. Energy Technology, 3(2), 168-176.
2015 Chodankar, N., Dubal, D., Gund, G., & Lokhande, C. (2015). Bendable all-solid-state asymmetric supercapacitors based on MnO₂ and Fe₂O₃ thin films. Energy Technology, 3(6), 625-631.
2015 Dhaygude, H., Shinde, S., Dubal, D., Lohar, G., & Fulari, V. (2015). Electrosynthesis of nanoflower like-ZnS thin films and its characterizations. Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics, 26(11), 8563-8567.
2015 Chodankar, N., Dubal, D., Lokhande, A., & Lokhande, C. (2015). Ionically conducting PVA-LiClO₄ gel electrolyte for high performance flexible solid state supercapacitors. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 460, 370-376.
2015 Gund, G., Dubal, D., Chodankar, N., Cho, J., Gomez-Romero, P., Park, C., & Lokhande, C. (2015). Low-cost flexible supercapacitors with high-energy density based on nanostructured MnO₂ and Fe₂O₃ thin films directly fabricated onto stainless steel. Scientific Reports, 5(1), 12454-1-12454-13.
2015 Salunkhe, D., Dubal, D., Sali, J., & Sankapal, B. (2015). Room temperature linker free growth of CdSe quantum dots on mesoporous TiO2: Solar cell application. Ceramics International, 41(3), 3940-3946.
2015 Shinde, S., Dubal, D., Ghodake, G., & Fulari, V. (2015). Hierarchical 3D-flower-like CuO nanostructure on copper foil for supercapacitors. RSC Advances, 5(6), 4443-4447.
2015 Dubal, D., Gomez-Romero, P., Sankapal, B., & Holze, R. (2015). Nickel cobaltite as an emerging material for supercapacitors: an overview. Nano Energy, 11, 377-399.
2015 Aradilla, D., Gaboriau, D., Bidan, G., Gentile, P., Boniface, M., Dubal, D., . . . Sadki, S. (2015). An innovative 3-D nanoforest heterostructure made of polypyrrole coated silicon nanotrees for new high performance hybrid micro-supercapacitors. Journal of Materials Chemistry A, 3(26), 13978-13985.
2015 Salunkhe, D., Dubal, D., Sali, J., & Sankapal, B. (2015). Linker free synthesis of TiO2/Bi2S3 heterostructure towards solar cell application: facile chemical routes. Materials Science in Semiconductor Processing, 30, 335-342.
2015 Nikam, S., Shinde, K., Dubal, D., Ghodake, G., Dhaygude, H., Relekar, B., . . . Fulari, V. (2015). Effect of Mn:(CuO/Cu(OH)2) Electrodes for Supercapacitors Application. Advanced Science Letters, 21(8), 2590-2593.
2015 Dubal, D., Suarez-Guevara, J., Tonti, D., Enciso, E., & Gomez-Romero, P. (2015). A high voltage solid state symmetric supercapacitor based on graphene-polyoxometalate hybrid electrodes with a hydroquinone doped hybrid gel-electrolyte. Journal of Materials Chemistry A, 3(46), 23483-23492.
2015 Shinde, S., Dubal, D., Ghodake, G., Dhaygude, H., Lohar, G., Relekar, B., & Fulari, V. (2015). Temperature dependence of cationic and anionic precursor on morphological improvement of CuO electrodes and its consequent effect on electrochemical supercapacitive properties. Advanced Science Letters, 21(8), 2653-2656.
2015 Dubal, D., Holze, R., & Gomez-Romero, P. (2015). Three-Dimensional Arrays of 1D MnO2 Nanocrystals for All-Solid-State Asymmetric Supercapacitors. ChemPlusChem, 80(6), 944-951.
2015 Sankapal, B., Gajare, H., Karade, S., & Dubal, D. (2015). Anchoring cobalt oxide nanoparticles on to the surface multiwalled carbon nanotubes for improved supercapacitive performances. RSC Advances, 5(60), 48426-48432.
2015 Dubal, D., Aradilla, D., Bidan, G., Gentile, P., Schubert, T., Wimberg, J., . . . Gomez-Romero, P. (2015). 3D hierarchical assembly of ultrathin MnO₂ nanoflakes on silicon nanowires for high performance micro-supercapacitors in Li- doped ionic liquid. Scientific Reports, 5(1), 09771-1-09771-10.
2015 Shinde, S., Dubal, D., Ghodake, G., Gomez-Romero, P., Kim, S., & Fulari, V. (2015). Influence of Mn incorporation on the supercapacitive properties of hybrid CuO/Cu(OH)<inf>2</inf> electrodes. RSC Advances, 5(39), 30478-30484.
2015 Dubal, D., Ayyad, O., Ruiz, V., & Gómez-Romero, P. (2015). Hybrid energy storage: The merging of battery and supercapacitor chemistries. Chemical Society Reviews, 44(7), 1777-1790.
2015 Chodankar, N., Dubal, D., Gund, G., & Lokhande, C. (2015). Flexible all-solid-state MnO₂ thin films based symmetric supercapacitors. Electrochimica Acta, 165, 338-347.
2014 Dubal, D., Holze, R., & Gomez-Romero, P. (2014). Development of hybrid materials based on sponge supported reduced graphene oxide and transition metal hydroxides for hybrid energy storage devices. Scientific Reports, 4(1), 7349-1-7349-10.
2014 Dubal, D., Kim, J., Kim, Y., Holze, R., Lokhande, C., & Kim, W. (2014). Supercapacitors Based on Flexible Substrates: An Overview. Energy Technology, 2(4), 325-341.
2014 Dubal, D., Gund, G., Lokhande, C., & Holze, R. (2014). Controlled growth of CoSₓ nanostrip arrays (CoSₓ-NSA) on nickel foam for asymmetric supercapacitors. Energy Technology, 2(4), 401-408.
2014 Shinde, S., Dubal, D., Ghodake, G., Kim, D., & Fulari, V. (2014). Nanoflower-like CuO/Cu(OH)2 hybrid thin films: Synthesis and electrochemical supercapacitive properties. Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry, 732, 80-85.
2014 Jambure, S., Gund, G., Dubal, D., Shinde, S., & Lokhande, C. (2014). Cost effective facile synthesis of TiO2 nanograins for flexible DSSC application using rose bengal dye. Electronic Materials Letters, 10(5), 943-950.
2014 Shinde, S., Dubal, D., Ghodake, G., & Fulari, V. (2014). Electronic impurities (Fe, Mn) doping in CdSe nanostructures for improvements in photoelectrochemical applications. RSC Advances, 4(63), 33184-33189.
2014 Shinde, S., Dubal, D., Ghodake, G., & Fulari, V. (2014). Morphological modulation of Mn:CdSe thin film and its enhanced electrochemical properties. Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry, 727, 179-183.
2014 Shinde, S., Dubal, D., Ghodake, G., Lee, D., Lohar, G., Rath, M., & Fulari, V. (2014). Baking impact of Fe composition on CdSe films for solar cell application. Materials Letters, 132, 243-246.
2014 Shinde, S., Ghodake, G., Dubal, D., Lohar, G., Lee, D., & Fulari, V. (2014). Structural, optical, and photo-electrochemical properties of marygold-like CdSe0.6Te0.4 synthesized by electrochemical route. Ceramics International, 40(8 PART A), 11519-11524.
2014 Chodankar, N., Gund, G., Dubal, D., & Lokhande, C. (2014). Alcohol mediated growth of α-MnO₂ thin films from KMnO₄ precursor for high performance supercapacitors. RSC Advances, 4(106), 61503-61513.
2014 Dighe, A., Dubal, D., & Holze, R. (2014). Screen Printed Asymmetric Supercapacitors based on LiCoO2 and Graphene Oxide. Zeitschrift fur Anorganische und Allgemeine Chemie, 640(14), 2852-2857.
2014 Shinde, S., Dubal, D., Ghodake, G., & Fulari, V. (2014). Synthesis and characterization of chemically deposited flower-like CdSe0.6Te0.4 thin films for solar cell application. Materials Letters, 126, 17-19.
2014 Sankapal, B., Gajare, H., Dubal, D., Gore, R., Salunkhe, R., & Ahn, H. (2014). Presenting highest supercapacitance for TiO₂/MWNTs nanocomposites: novel method. Chemical Engineering Journal, 247, 103-110.
2014 Gund, G., Dubal, D., Shinde, S., & Lokhande, C. (2014). Architectured morphologies of chemically prepared NiO/MWCNTs nanohybrid thin films for high performance supercapacitors. ACS Applied Materials and Interfaces, 6(5), 3176-3188.
2014 Shinde, S., Gund, G., Dubal, D., Jambure, S., & Lokhande, C. (2014). Morphological modulation of polypyrrole thin films through oxidizing agents and their concurrent effect on supercapacitor performance. Electrochimica Acta, 119, 1-10.
2014 Dubal, D., Gund, G., Holze, R., & Lokhande, C. (2014). Enhancement in supercapacitive properties of CuO thin films due to the surfactant mediated morphological modulation. Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry, 712, 40-46.
2013 Gund, G., Dubal, D., Dhawale, D., Shinde, S., & Lokhande, C. (2013). Porous CuO nanosheet clusters prepared by a surfactant assisted hydrothermal method for high performance supercapacitors. RSC Advances, 3(46), 24099-24107.
2013 Shinde, S., Thombare, J., Dubal, D., & Fulari, V. (2013). Electrochemical synthesis of photosensitive nano-nest like CdSe₀.₆Te₀.₄ thin films. Applied Surface Science, 282, 561-565.
2013 Dubal, D., Gund, G., Holze, R., Jadhav, H., Lokhande, C., & Park, C. (2013). Surfactant-assisted morphological tuning of hierarchical CuO thin films for electrochemical supercapacitors. Dalton Transactions, 42(18), 6459-6467.
2013 Dubal, D., Gund, G., Holze, R., & Lokhande, C. (2013). Mild chemical strategy to grow micro-roses and micro-woolen like arranged CuO nanosheets for high performance supercapacitors. Journal of Power Sources, 242, 687-698.
2013 Gund, G., Dubal, D., Jambure, S., Shinde, S., & Lokhande, C. (2013). Temperature influence on morphological progress of Ni(OH)2 thin films and its subsequent effect on electrochemical supercapacitive properties. Journal of Materials Chemistry A, 1(15), 4793-4803.
2013 Dubal, D., & Holze, R. (2013). Self-assembly of stacked layers of Mn3O4 nanosheets using a scalable chemical strategy for enhanced, flexible, electrochemical energy storage. Journal of Power Sources, 238, 274-282.
2013 Gund, G., Dubal, D., Shinde, S., & Lokhande, C. (2013). One step hydrothermal synthesis of micro-belts like β-Ni(OH) 2 thin films for supercapacitors. Ceramics International, 39(6), 7255-7261.
2013 Dubal, D., Gund, G., Holze, R., Jadhav, H., Lokhande, C., & Park, C. (2013). Solution-based binder-free synthetic approach of RuO2 thin films for all solid state supercapacitors. Electrochimica Acta, 103, 103-109.
2013 Dubal, D., Gund, G., Lokhande, C., & Holze, R. (2013). Decoration of spongelike Ni(OH)<inf>2</inf> nanoparticles onto MWCNTs using an easily manipulated chemical protocol for supercapacitors. ACS Applied Materials and Interfaces, 5(7), 2446-2454.
2013 Dubal, D., & Holze, R. (2013). All-solid-state flexible thin film supercapacitor based on Mn₃O₄ stacked nanosheets with gel electrolyte. Energy, 51(C), 407-412.
2013 Gund, G., Dubal, D., Patil, B., Shinde, S., & Lokhande, C. (2013). Enhanced activity of chemically synthesized hybrid graphene oxide/Mn <inf>3</inf>O<inf>4</inf> composite for high performance supercapacitors. Electrochimica Acta, 92, 205-215.
2013 Dubal, D., & Holze, R. (2013). A successive ionic layer adsorption and reaction (SILAR) method to induce Mn<inf>3</inf>O<inf>4</inf> nanospots on CNTs for supercapacitors. New Journal of Chemistry, 37(2), 403-408.
2013 Dubal, D., Gund, G., Lokhande, C., & Holze, R. (2013). CuO cauliflowers for supercapacitor application: novel potentiodynamic deposition. Materials Research Bulletin, 48(2), 923-928.
2013 Dubal, D., Holze, R., & Kulal, P. (2013). Enhanced supercapacitive performances of hierarchical porous nanostructure assembled from ultrathin MnO<inf>2</inf> nanoflakes. Journal of Materials Science, 48(2), 714-719.
2013 Dubal, D., Patil, S., Gund, G., & Lokhande, C. (2013). Polyaniline-polypyrrole nanograined composite via electrostatic adsorption for high performance electrochemical supercapacitors. Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 552, 240-247.
2013 Dubal, D., Kim, J., Kim, Y., Holze, R., & Kim, W. (2013). Demonstrating the highest supercapacitive performance of branched MnO₂ nanorods grown directly on flexible substrates using controlled chemistry at ambient temperature. Energy Technology, 1(2-3), 125-130.
2013 Dubal, D., & Lokhande, C. (2013). Significant improvement in the electrochemical performances of nano-nest like amorphous MnO <inf>2</inf> electrodes due to Fe doping. Ceramics International, 39(1), 415-423.
2012 Dubal, D., Jagadale, A., & Lokhande, C. (2012). Big as well as light weight portable, Mn₃O₄ based symmetric supercapacitive devices: fabrication, performance evaluation and demonstration. Electrochimica Acta, 80, 160-170.
2012 Dubal, D., Lee, S., Kim, J., Kim, W., & Lokhande, C. (2012). Porous polypyrrole clusters prepared by electropolymerization for a high performance supercapacitor. Journal of Materials Chemistry, 22(7), 3044-3052.
2012 Dubal, D., Jagadale, A., Patil, S., & Lokhande, C. (2012). Simple route for the synthesis of supercapacitive Co-Ni mixed hydroxide thin films. Materials Research Bulletin, 47(5), 1239-1245.
2012 Dubal, D., Lee, S., & Kim, W. (2012). Sponge-like β-Ni(OH) <inf>2</inf> nanoparticles: Synthesis, characterization and electrochemical properties. Journal of Materials Science, 47(8), 3817-3821.
2012 Jagadale, A., Dubal, D., & Lokhande, C. (2012). Electrochemical behavior of potentiodynamically deposited cobalt oxyhydroxide (CoOOH) thin films for supercapacitor application. Materials Research Bulletin, 47(3), 672-676.
2012 Dubal, D., Fulari, V., & Lokhande, C. (2012). Effect of morphology on supercapacitive properties of chemically grown β-Ni(OH)₂ thin films. Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, 151, 511-516.
2012 Shinde, N., Dubal, D., Dhawale, D., Lokhande, C., Kim, J., & Moon, J. (2012). Room temperature novel chemical synthesis of Cu <inf>2</inf>ZnSnS <inf>4</inf> (CZTS) absorbing layer for photovoltaic application. Materials Research Bulletin, 47(2), 302-307.
2012 Dubal, D., Kim, W., & Lokhande, C. (2012). Galvanostatically deposited Fe: MnO<inf>2</inf> electrodes for supercapacitor application. Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids, 73(1), 18-24.
2012 Salunkhe, D., Gargote, S., Dubal, D., Kim, W., & Sankapal, B. (2012). Sb<inf>2</inf>S<inf>3</inf> nanoparticles through solution chemistry on mesoporous TiO<inf>2</inf> for solar cell application. Chemical Physics Letters, 554, 150-154.
2012 Dubal, D., & Holze, R. (2012). High capacity rechargeable battery electrode based on mesoporous stacked Mn₃O₄ nanosheets. RSC Advances, 2(32), 12096-12100.
2011 Dubal, D., Patil, S., Kim, W., & Lokhande, C. (2011). Supercapacitors based on electrochemically deposited polypyrrole nanobricks. Materials Letters, 65(17-18), 2628-2631.
2011 Kulal, P., Dubal, D., & Fulari, V. (2011). Single step electrochemical synthesis of Sb2Se3 thin films: Effect of molarities of precursor solution. Journal of Materials Science, 46(8), 2789-2795.
2011 Dubal, D., Patil, S., Jagadale, A., & Lokhande, C. (2011). Two step novel chemical synthesis of polypyrrole nanoplates for supercapacitor application. Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 509(32), 8183-8188.
2011 Dhawale, D., Dubal, D., Phadatare, M., Patil, J., & Lokhande, C. (2011). Synthesis and characterizations of CdS nanorods by SILAR method: Effect of film thickness. Journal of Materials Science, 46(14), 5009-5015.
2011 Dubal, D., Dhawale, D., More, A., & Lokhande, C. (2011). Synthesis and characterization of photosensitive TiO<inf>2</inf> nanorods by controlled precipitation route. Journal of Materials Science, 46(7), 2288-2293.
2011 Dubal, D., Dhawale, D., Gujar, T., & Lokhande, C. (2011). Effect of different modes of electrodeposition on supercapacitive properties of MnO<inf>2</inf> thin films. Applied Surface Science, 257(8), 3378-3382.
2011 Lokhande, C., Dubal, D., & Joo, O. (2011). Metal oxide thin film based supercapacitors. Current Applied Physics, 11(3), 255-270.
2011 Kulal, P., Dubal, D., Lokhande, C., & Fulari, V. (2011). Chemical synthesis of Fe<inf>2</inf>O<inf>3</inf> thin films for supercapacitor application. Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 509(5), 2567-2571.
2011 Dubal, D., Kim, W., & Lokhande, C. (2011). Surfactant assisted electrodeposition of MnO<inf>2</inf> thin films: Improved supercapacitive properties. Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 509(41), 10050-10054.
2010 Dubal, D., Dhawale, D., Salunkhe, R., & Lokhande, C. (2010). Conversion of chemically prepared interlocked cubelike Mn<inf>3</inf> O<inf>4</inf> to birnessite MnO<inf>2</inf> using electrochemical cycling. Journal of the Electrochemical Society, 157(7), A812-A817.
2010 Dhawale, D., Dubal, D., Deokate, R., Gujar, T., Sun, Y., & Lokhande, C. (2010). PVA assisted growth of hydrophobic honeycomb network of CdS thin films. Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 503(2), 422-425.
2010 Dhawale, D., Dubal, D., Jamadade, V., Salunkhe, R., Joshi, S., & Lokhande, C. (2010). Room temperature LPG sensor based on n-CdS/p-polyaniline heterojunction. Sensors and Actuators, B: Chemical, 145(1), 205-210.
2010 Dhawale, D., Dubal, D., Salunkhe, R., Gujar, T., Rath, M., & Lokhande, C. (2010). Effect of electron irradiation on properties of chemically deposited TiO<inf>2</inf> nanorods. Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 499(1), 63-67.
2010 Dubal, D., Dhawale, D., Salunkhe, R., Jamdade, V., & Lokhande, C. (2010). Fabrication of copper oxide multilayer nanosheets for supercapacitor application. Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 492(1-2), 26-30.
2010 Dhawale, D., Dubal, D., More, A., Gujar, T., & Lokhande, C. (2010). Room temperature liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) sensor. Sensors and Actuators, B: Chemical, 147(2), 488-494.
2010 Dubal, D., Dhawale, D., Salunkhe, R., & Lokhande, C. (2010). A novel chemical synthesis of Mn<inf>3</inf>O<inf>4</inf> thin film and its stepwise conversion into birnessite MnO<inf>2</inf> during super capacitive studies. Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry, 647(1), 60-65.
2010 Dubal, D., Dhawale, D., Salunkhe, R., Pawar, S., & Lokhande, C. (2010). A novel chemical synthesis and characterization of Mn<inf>3</inf>O<inf>4</inf> thin films for supercapacitor application. Applied Surface Science, 256(14), 4411-4416.
2010 Dhawale, D., Salunkhe, R., Jamadade, V., Dubal, D., Pawar, S., & Lokhande, C. (2010). Hydrophilic polyaniline nanofibrous architecture using electrosynthesis method for supercapacitor application. Current Applied Physics, 10(3), 904-909.
2010 Dubal, D., Dhawale, D., Salunkhe, R., Fulari, V., & Lokhande, C. (2010). Chemical synthesis and characterization of Mn<inf>3</inf>O<inf>4</inf> thin films for supercapacitor application. Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 497(1-2), 166-170.
2010 Dubal, D., Dhawale, D., Salunkhe, R., & Lokhande, C. (2010). Conversion of interlocked cube-like Mn<inf>3</inf>O<inf>4</inf> into nanoflakes of layered birnessite MnO<inf>2</inf> during supercapacitive studies. Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 496(1-2), 370-375.
2010 Dhawale, D., Dubal, D., Jamadade, V., Salunkhe, R., & Lokhande, C. (2010). Fuzzy nanofibrous network of polyaniline electrode for supercapacitor application. Synthetic Metals, 160(5-6), 519-522.
2009 Dubal, D., Dhawale, D., Salunkhe, R., Pawar, S., Fulari, V., & Lokhande, C. (2009). A novel chemical synthesis of interlocked cubes of hausmannite Mn<inf>3</inf>O<inf>4</inf> thin films for supercapacitor application. Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 484(1-2), 218-221.
2009 Salunkhe, R., Dhawale, D., Dubal, D., & Lokhande, C. (2009). Sprayed CdO thin films for liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) detection. Sensors and Actuators, B: Chemical, 140(1), 86-91.
2017 Dubal, D., & Gomez-Romero, P. (Eds.) (2017). Metal Oxides in Supercapacitors. Netherlands: Elsevier.
2012 Dubal, D., & Lokhande, C. (2012). Supercapacitors: Electrochemical Energy Storage Device Electrochemistry Behind the Synthesis of Manganese Oxide Thin Films as an Electrode Material for Supercapacitors. LAP Lambert Academic Publishing.
2017 Dubal, D., Chodankar, N., Gomez-Romero, P., & Kim, D. (2017). Fundamentals of binary metal oxides-based supercapacitors. In D. Dubal, & P. Gomez-Romero (Eds.), Metal Oxides in Supercapacitors (pp. 79-98). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier.
2014 Dubal, D., & Holze, R. (2014). X-Ray Diffraction Methods. In R. Holze (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Applied Electrochemistry. Springer New York.
2017 Cabán-Huertas, Z., Dubal, D., Ayyad, O., & Gómez-Romero, P. (2017). Capacitive vs Faradaic Energy Storage in a Hybrid Cell with LiFePO4/RGO Positive Electrode and Nanocarbon Negative Electrode. In Journal of the Electrochemical Society Vol. 164 (pp. A6140-A6146). Chicago, IL: ELECTROCHEMICAL SOC INC.
2015 Gund, G., Dubal, D., Aradilla, D., Mueller-Sebert, W., Bidan, G., Gaboriau, D., . . . Gomez-Romero, P. (2015). Diamond-coated silicon nanowires for enhanced micro-supercapacitor with ionic liquids. In 2015 International Conference on Industrial Instrumentation and Control, ICIC 2015 (pp. 1125-1128). Coll Engn Pune, Pune, INDIA: IEEE.
2014 Dubal, D., & Holze, R. (2014). Synthesis, properties, and performance of nanostructured metal oxides for supercapacitors. In Pure and Applied Chemistry. 9th International Conference on Novel Materials and their Synthesis (NMS-IX) Vol. 86 (pp. 611-632). Shanghai, China: Walter de Gruyter GmbH.
2016 Dubal, D., Gomez-Romero, P., Bidan, G., & Aradilla, D. (2016). WO2016142438 A1, Electrode material comprising silicon nanowires covered by a mesoporous oxide nanostructured coating and ionic liquid electrolytes for energy storage applications. Spain and France.
2016 Dubal, D. (2016). WO2016185071, Graphene-based electroactive nanofluids as liquid electrodes in flow cells. Spain.
2010 Shinde, N. M., Dubal, D., & Lokhande, C. D. (2010). 3073/MUM/2010, Low cost and large area chemical deposition of CZTS thin films. India.
2010 Shinde, N. M., Dubal, D., & Lokhande, C. D. (2010). 3072/MUM/2010, Room temperature chemical method for the synthesis of Cu2ZnSnS4 absorbing layer. India.
2010 Dubal, D., Patil, S. V., & Lokhande, C. D. (2010). 2964/MUM/2010, Chemically deposited polypyrrole thin films for supercapacitor application. India.
2009 Dhawale, D. S., Dubal, D., & Lokhande, C. D. (2009). 1990/MUM/2009, Supercapacitor based on chemically deposited polyaniline thin films. India.
2009 Dubal, D., Dhawale, D. S., & Lokhande, C. D. (2009). 1989/MUM/2009, Supercapacitor based on chemically deposited manganese oxide thin films. India.

matches: V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V.


text:
Cindy Leigh Decker, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.
Kevin Eugene Carter (appellant) was convicted in a jury trial of unlawfully driving a motor vehicle on a highway while under the influence of alcohol (DUI) in violation of Code ? 18.2-266. The sole issue on appeal is whether the evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s guilty verdict of driving under the influence. For the following reasons, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Under familiar principles of appellate review, we examine the evidence in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth, the prevailing party below, granting to it all reasonable inferences fairly deducible therefrom. See Juares v. Commonwealth, 26 Va. App. 154, 156, 493 S.E.2d 677, 678 (1997).
So viewed, the evidence established that on November 5, 1999, at approximately 8:40 p.m., Charles Robert Rogers (Rogers) was driving south on Meetze Road in the direction of Route 28 in Fauquier County. When Rogers approached Beach Street, a dark blue sedan drove through a stop sign and made a wide right-hand turn onto Meetze Road. The car veered into the wrong travel lane before the driver corrected his course and traveled south in the appropriate lane. Approximately twenty seconds later, the sedan turned onto Casanova Road. Rogers also turned onto Casanova Road and was travelling at fifty miles per hour. The blue car’s speed kept increasing until Rogers lost sight of it. Shortly thereafter, Rogers reached a turn in the road and saw the blue sedan on the side of the road where it had struck a detached garage. Rogers stopped at the scene of the accident and remained there for about twenty or twenty-five minutes. At trial, Rogers saw pictures of the crash site which he said were a fair and accurate depiction of the scene. Two of these pictures show appellant to be trapped behind the wheel and the sole occupant of the car.
Trooper Bradley Morris (Trooper Morris) of the Virginia State Police was dispatched to the accident at approximately 9:06 p.m. and arrived at the scene at 9:16 p.m. to find appellant trapped in the car on the driver’s side. The Catlett Fire Department and Rescue Squad arrived and had to cut off the top of the vehicle to free appellant. When appellant was placed in the ambulance Trooper Morris observed his eyes to be bloodshot and watery and he smelled of alcohol. There were no other occupants in or near the crash scene.
[T]he Jury could conclude in this case that the Defendant, given his condition as evident from this photograph, had not had anything to drink after the accident. He smelled of alcohol, had red eyes; and then as the Commonwealth Attorney has said, operated –- they could infer that he operated the vehicle in the fashion which he did, that they could find him guilty under the circumstances.
Appellant then testified that there were several people in the car and that “William Brown” was the driver and he was a passenger. He acknowledged that the car belonged to his wife. Appellant claimed that as a result of the accident he was unconscious and as he was regaining his senses, Brown and the other two passengers were trying to help him get out of the car. However, while he was trying to get out, the roof of the garage collapsed and the other three people left. Neither Brown nor the other two passengers appellant described testified at trial. The jury found appellant guilty of DUI and imposed a sentence of twelve months incarceration. Appellant timely noted his appeal.
“On review, this Court does not substitute its judgment for that of the trier of fact. Instead, the jury’s verdict will not be set aside unless it appears that it is plainly wrong or without supporting evidence.” Canipe v. Commonwealth, 25 Va. App. 629, 644, 491 S.E.2d 747, 754 (1997) (internal citations omitted).
Appellant first argues that the evidence was insufficient to prove that he was the driver of the car because no one at trial testified that he was the driver and he denied operating the vehicle. Although Trooper Morris found appellant behind the wheel of the vehicle, he did not observe appellant manipulating any of the mechanical or electrical equipment of the car. Appellant thus contends that the evidence is insufficient to support a conclusion that he drove the car. This argument is without merit.
“‘[C]ircumstantial evidence is as competent and is entitled to as much weight as direct evidence, provided it is sufficiently convincing to exclude every reasonable hypothesis except that of guilt.'” Williams v. Commonwealth, 33 Va. App. 796, 807, 537 S.E.2d 21, 26 (2000) (quoting Coleman v. Commonwealth, 226 Va. 31, 53, 307 S.E.2d 864, 876 (1983)). “However, ‘the Commonwealth need only exclude reasonable hypotheses of innocence that flow from the evidence, not those that spring from the imagination of the defendant.'” Wilson v. Commonwealth, 31 Va. App. 495, 509, 525 S.E.2d 1, 8 (2000) (quoting Hamilton v. Commonwealth, 16 Va. App. 751, 755, 433 S.E.2d 27, 29 (1993)).
The credibility of a witness and the inferences to be drawn from proven facts are matters solely for the fact finder’s determination. See Long v. Commonwealth , 8 Va. App. 194, 199, 379 S.E.2d 473, 476 (1989). In its role of judging witness credibility, the fact finder is entitled to disbelieve the self-serving testimony of the accused and to conclude that the accused is lying to conceal his guilt. See Speight v. Commonwealth , 4 Va. App. 83, 88, 354 S.E.2d 95, 98 (1987) (en banc).
Marable v. Commonwealth , 27 Va. App. 505, 509-10, 500 S.E.2d 233, 235 (1998).
In Keesee v. Commonwealth, 32 Va. App. 263, 527 S.E.2d 473 (2000), we found the evidence sufficient to prove the appellant was “operating” a motor vehicle on very similar facts. In that case, the police officer who arrived at the scene of an accident found the appellant to be the only person in the car. He was trapped in the car with his legs pinned under the steering wheel and dashboard, and he was unable to move.
In the instant case, viewed in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth, appellant was the sole occupant of the car at the scene of the accident. No one else was present at or near the crash site, and the car belonged to his wife. The jury was not required to believe appellant, a convicted felon, but rather could determine that he was being untruthful in his testimony that other people were in the car. Additionally, appellant was immobilized behind the wheel and had to be cut out of the car. The fact that he was trapped behind the wheel is evidence tending to negate his explanation that he was sliding over to get out of the car. The jury was entitled to disbelieve appellant’s self-serving statements and conclude that he was the operator of the vehicle. Accordingly, we cannot say that the judgment is plainly wrong or without evidence to support it.
Further, “[t]he court or jury trying the case involving a violation of clause (ii), (iii) or (iv) of ? 18.2-266 or ? 18.2-266.1 shall determine the innocence or guilt of the defendant from all the evidence concerning his condition at the time of the alleged offense.” Code ? 18.2-268.10 (emphasis added).
We also find no merit to appellant’s argument that the Commonwealth failed to meet its burden because they presented no alcohol tests. Code ? 18.2-268.10 allows the trier of fact to look at all the evidence regarding the condition of the defendant at the time of the alleged offense.
[T]he admission of the blood or breath test results shall not limit the introduction of any other relevant evidence bearing upon any question at issue before the court, and the court shall, regardless of the result of any blood or breath tests, consider other relevant admissible evidence on the condition of the accused.
In the instant case, properly viewed, the Commonwealth’s evidence proved that appellant drove his car erratically, swerved across the center line and exceeded the speed limit. A short time later his car crashed with great force into a garage, trapping appellant behind the wheel. Further, when Trooper Morris saw appellant, his eyes were bloodshot and watery and he smelled of alcohol. See Overbee v. Commonwealth, 227 Va. 238, 245, 315 S.E.2d 242, 245 (1984) (“The jury could conclude that if Overbee smelled [of] alcohol and had red eyes, yet did not drink after he stopped his truck, then he must have consumed alcoholic beverages before or during his operation of the vehicle.”). The fact finder could reasonably find that this evidence established that appellant was intoxicated and the alcohol had affected his “manner, disposition, speech, muscular movement, general appearance or behavior.” Code ? 4.1-100.
Next, appellant contends that pursuant to Bland v. City of Richmond, 190 Va. 42, 55 S.E.2d 289 (1949), and Coffey v. Commonwealth, 202 Va. 185, 116 S.E.2d 257 (1960), this case must be reversed because the Commonwealth failed to exclude the hypothesis that appellant became intoxicated after the car wreck. This case is distinguishable from Bland and Coffey.
In Bland, the Court held that the officer’s testimony that Bland was intoxicated and talked with a “thick tongue” supported a reasonable inference of intoxication. However, the Court held that the vagueness in time between when the accident occurred and when Bland returned to the scene did not exclude the reasonable hypothesis that he drank alcohol between the time he left his car and the time he was picked up.
In Coffey, the defendant’s conviction for drunk driving was reversed because there was conflicting evidence regarding whether or not Coffey had consumed alcohol following the accident. While there was sufficient evidence of intoxication, Coffey’s son testified that he had given his father a drink of whiskey after the accident. In the instant case, there is no evidence of either opportunity or ability to consume alcohol after the accident. Rogers found appellant trapped in the car immediately after the crash and unable to move. Appellant did not leave the scene of the accident, and there was no evidence of alcohol at or near the car. Additionally, appellant testified that he was unconscious and unable to move. This evidence negates any “reasonable hypothesis of innocence” that appellant drank alcohol after the accident.
The circumstantial evidence was sufficient to prove that appellant was intoxicated when he drove his wife’s car, and no evidence shows that he became intoxicated after the wreck. Accordingly, we cannot say that the judgment is plainly wrong or without evidence to support it.
	Appellant was also convicted of operating a motor vehicle after having been declared an habitual offender, 2nd offense; however, that conviction is not the subject of this appeal.

matches: v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v.


Petitioners are lawful permanent United States residents subject to administratively final removal orders because they were convicted of aggravated felonies. Each filed a petition for review in the Second Circuit pursuant to 8 U. S. C. §1252(a)(1) and a habeas corpus petition in the District Court pursuant to 28 U. S. C. §2241 in order to challenge the Board of Immigration Appeals' determination that, as a matter of law, they were ineligible to apply for a discretionary waiver of deportation under former §212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The Second Circuit dismissed their petitions for lack of jurisdiction, holding that they could nevertheless pursue their claims in a §2241 action in district court.
Held: The Second Circuit lacked jurisdiction to hear the petitions for direct review, but petitioners can proceed with their habeas petitions if they wish to obtain relief. The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA) expressly precludes courts of appeals from exercising jurisdiction to review a final removal order against an alien removable by reason of a conviction for, inter alia, an aggravated felony. 8 U. S. C. §1252(a)(2)(C). This plain language explicitly strips the courts of appeals of the ability to hear petitioners' claims on direct review. However, because Congress has not spoken with sufficient clarity to strip the district courts of jurisdiction to hear habeas petitions raising identical claims, see INS v. St. Cyr, ante, at ___, petitioners may pursue their claims in a §2241 action. Pp. 2-4.
Stevens, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer, JJ., joined. O'Connor, J., filed a dissenting opinion. Scalia, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Rehnquist, C. J., and Thomas, J., joined.
Deboris Calcano-Martinez, Sergio Madrid, and Fazila Khan are all lawful permanent residents of the United States subject to administratively final orders of removal. They conceded that they are deportable based upon their past criminal convictions, but each filed both a petition for review in the Second Circuit pursuant to 8 U. S. C.
§1252(a)(1) (1994 ed., Supp. V) and a habeas corpus petition in the District Court pursuant to 28 U. S. C. §2241 in order to challenge the Board of Immigration Appeals' determination that, as a matter of law, petitioners were ineligible to apply for a discretionary waiver of deportation under former §212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 66 Stat. 182, 8 U. S. C. §1182(c) (1994 ed.). Their petitions for review were consolidated in the Court of Appeals, which subsequently dismissed the petitions for lack of jurisdiction, holding that petitioners could nevertheless pursue their constitutional and statutory claims in a district court habeas action brought pursuant to 28 U. S. C. §2241. 232 F. 3d 328 (CA2 2000). We granted certiorari in this case, 531 U. S. 1108 (2001), and in INS v. St. Cyr, No. 00-767, 531 U. S. 1107 (2001), in order to comprehensively consider whether aliens in the petitioners' position may seek relief in the Court of Appeals (pursuant to 8 U. S. C. §1252(a)(1)); in the district court (pursuant to 28 U. S. C. §2241); or not at all. For the reasons stated below and in our opinion in INS v. St. Cyr, ante, p.__, we agree with the Court of Appeals that it lacks jurisdiction to hear the petitions for direct review at issue in this case and that petitioners must, therefore, proceed with their petitions for habeas corpus if they wish to obtain relief.
As petitioners in this case were convicted of "aggravated felonies" within the meaning of the relevant statutes,3 the plain language of §1252(a)(2)(C) fairly explicitly strips the courts of appeals of jurisdiction to hear their claims on petitions for direct review. Without much discussion, the Court of Appeals so held. 232 F. 3d, at 342-343.
Before this Court, petitioners primarily argue that constitutional considerations and background principles of statutory interpretation require that they be afforded some forum for the adjudication of the merits of their claims. They devote the bulk of their briefs to arguing that the Court of Appeals--motivated by these concerns--properly interpreted IIRIRA's jurisdiction-stripping provision not to preclude aliens such as petitioners from pursuing habeas relief pursuant to 28 U. S. C. §2241. Brief for Petitioners 12-42, 44-49. In the alternative, they argue that we might construe the same provisions as stripping jurisdiction from the courts of appeals over only some matters, leaving in place their jurisdiction to directly review petitions raising claims previously cognizable under §2241. Id., at 42-44.
We agree with petitioners that leaving aliens without a forum for adjudicating claims such as those raised in this case would raise serious constitutional questions. We also agree with petitioners--and the Court of Appeals--that these concerns can best be alleviated by construing the jurisdiction-stripping provisions of that statute not to preclude aliens such as petitioners from pursuing habeas relief pursuant to §2241. See St. Cyr, ante, at __.
Finding no support in the text or history of §1252 for concluding that the courts of appeals retain jurisdiction to hear petitions such as those brought in this case, but concluding that Congress has not spoken with sufficient clarity to strip the district courts of jurisdiction to hear habeas petitions raising identical claims, we affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals in all particulars.
For the reasons stated in my dissenting opinion in the companion case of INS v. St. Cyr, ante, at ___, I agree with Justice Scalia's proposed disposition of the instant case.
For the reasons stated in my dissenting opinion in the companion case of INS v. St. Cyr, ante, at __, I would vacate the judgment of the court below and remand with instructions to dismiss for want of jurisdiction, with prejudice to petitioners Calcano-Martinez's and Madrid's refiling in the District Court.
An additional difference between the old and the new statute with regard to petitions for review is one of nomenclature. In keeping with a statute-wide change in terminology, the new provision refers to orders of "removal" rather than orders of "deportation" or "exclusion." Compare 8 U. S. C. §1252(a)(1) (1994 ed., Supp. V), with §1105a (1994 ed.).
The scope of this preclusion is not entirely clear. Though the text of the provision is quite broad, it is not without its ambiguities. Throughout this litigation, the government has conceded that the courts of appeals have the power to hear petitions challenging the factual determinations thought to trigger the jurisdiction-stripping provision (such as whether an individual is an alien and whether he or she has been convicted of an "aggravated felony" within the meaning of the statute). See Brief for Respondent 22-23. In addition, the government has also conceded that the courts of appeals retain jurisdiction to review "substantial constitutional challenges" raised by aliens who come within the strictures of §1252(a)(2)(C). See id., at 23-24. As the petitions in this case do not raise any of these types of issues, we need not address this point further. Nonetheless, it remains instructive that the government acknowledges that background principles of statutory construction and constitutional concerns must be considered in determining the scope of IIRIRA's jurisdiction-stripping provisions.
All three petitioners were convicted of controlled substance offenses for which they served between four months and four years in prison. Each concedes that his or her crime is an "aggravated felony" as defined in 8 U. S. C. §1101(a)(43), which renders him or her removable pursuant to §1227(a)(2)(A)(iii).


text:
STANLEY W. DENNIS vs. ANNA DENNIS.
A woman as libellee in a divorce proceeding was barred from obtaining a vacation of a decree of divorce on the grounds that her husband as libellant had obtained the decree by perpetrating a fraud on the court respecting essential jurisdictional facts and that it had had no jurisdiction, where it appeared that she had answered in the proceeding and had been present and represented by counsel at the hearing therein but had refrained from contesting or participating in the hearing, and had obtained in the proceeding benefits for the parties' son, and that after the divorce the libellant had married another woman and had died; and it was immaterial in the circumstances that the libellee relied on a promise made by the libellant after the divorce that he would establish a trust fund for the maintenance of the son.
LIBEL for divorce, filed in the Probate Court for the county of Middlesex on April 3, 1946.
A petition by the libellee, Anna Dennis, to vacate a decree of divorce obtained by the libellant was filed on September 16, 1955, and was dismissed by Leggat, J. She appealed.
Melvin J. Levine, for the petitioner.
Edward R. Bonitz, (Sidney L. Mitchell of New York & James J. Curley with him,) for the appellee.
WHITTEMORE, J. This is an appeal from an order of the Probate Court for Middlesex County which dismissed the petition of a libellee in prior divorce proceedings in that court to vacate the divorce decree. The grounds for relief alleged in the petition were fraud on the court and lack of jurisdiction.
There is a report of material facts and the evidence is also before us. The judge found, appropriately, the facts stated in the following paragraphs.
The divorce decree became absolute on May 12, 1947. The libellant had died on June 17, 1954, at Bay Shore, Long Island, New York, leaving a will, which was admitted to probate there and which made no provision for the petitioner nor for the child of the marriage. The petitioner filed a notice of election to waive the provisions of the will and to claim her interest in the estate as the surviving widow. The executrix, whom the libellant had married in 1952, moved to strike the notice. The proceedings in New York awaited the outcome of these proceedings, which are contested by the executrix. The executrix filed in the Probate Court a motion to dismiss the petition for revocation and has filed a brief as appellee.
years next preceding the filing of the libel, dated March 2, 1946, he had lived at 14 Armory Street, Wakefield. Neither the petitioner nor her counsel took any part in the hearing. Upon the record there appeared to be jurisdiction to grant a divorce. The decree nisi, entered November 12, 1946, awarded the care and custody of the minor child to the petitioner and ordered the libellant to pay $20 a month for the support of the child. Fifteen hundred dollars was deposited with the attorney for the petitioner to secure the payments. The petitioner relied upon the libellant's promise, made subsequent to the decree absolute of divorce, that he would establish a trust fund for the maintenance of the son, a victim of multiple sclerosis.
The parties had lived together only in the State of New York. The libellant deserted the petitioner in 1939. She found him in 1941 with the aid of a detective. At that time he was living in Brooklyn, New York, as husband and wife, with the executrix. He was then arrested on the complaint of the petitioner on process of the Domestic Relations Court of New York city and ordered to pay support for the child. In May, 1942, the libellant moved to Bay Shore, Long Island, New York, and was employed by Fairchild Engine and Airplane Company at Farmingdale, Long Island. On May 11, 1943, he was inducted into the United States Army from Brooklyn, New York, and went overseas. The petitioner received an allotment during his army service. He was discharged from the army at Fort Dix, New Jersey, on December 28, 1945, and returned to Bay Shore, Long Island, New York. From 1942 to 1946 the libellant's mother lived at 14 Armory Street, Wakefield, and the libellant visited her there just before he went overseas and again in March, 1946, when the libel was signed. "The State of New York has given full faith and credit to . . . [the divorce] decree in recognizing . . . [the executrix] as . . . [the libellant's] widow." The petitioner did nothing to revoke the decree until after the death of the libellant.
"and knew nothing of the libellant's whereabouts from 1941 to that time, except that he was in the army." We think this finding is somewhat more favorable to the petitioner than her own testimony warrants, and that it can reasonably be concluded, as the appellee contends, that the petitioner knew that her husband had an abode in Brooklyn in 1943 when he was drafted there and that she learned from her niece who lived in Bay Shore, Long Island, soon after the husband's discharge from the army in 1945, that he was living in Bay Shore, Long Island. However we do not think there was any evidence which required a finding that the petitioner consciously withheld information which she knew to be material. The result here is not affected by the absence of such a finding, and as it was not made by the judge who heard and saw the witnesses, we ascribe no bad faith to the petitioner in not disclosing facts which were material.
The decree of divorce, although beyond the court's power for want of statutory jurisdiction, was nevertheless binding on the parties until and unless reversed on direct attack. See Old Colony Trust Co. v. Porter, 324 Mass. 581, 586-587; Sherrer v. Sherrer, 334 U.S. 343; Coe v. Coe, 334 U.S. 378; Rubinstein v. Rubinstein, 324 Mass. 340, 342; Royal v. Royal, 324 Mass. 613, 618.
obtained in proceedings in which both husband and wife participated was attacked in subsequent proceedings in this Commonwealth. These cases were decided while it was supposed that constitutional requirements of full faith and credit did not prevent collateral attack on a foreign decree of divorce in the courts of the jurisdiction of original domicil (see Andrews v. Andrews, 188 U.S. 14; Sherrer v. Sherrer, 334 U.S. 343), so that this court acted as with power to determine the effect of the decree in this State equal to that which it would have had in the case of a domestic decree.
proceedings in Nebraska which resulted in decrees declaring the divorce valid and the wife then also took another spouse. Following the husband's death his second wife brought a petition in the Probate Court asking as the widow an allowance for necessaries. This court reversed the decree which had dismissed that petition. While the court in the opinion spoke of the connivance and collusion of the first wife in the North Dakota divorce, we think that the basic principle is stated in the following language (page 434): "Where a party has invoked the jurisdiction of a court and the other party has voluntarily appeared and submitted thereto, it is not consonant with ordinary conceptions of justice to countenance an attempt at repudiation of that jurisdiction, especially when the attempt would involve the receiving of considerable sums of money without consideration, the confession of bigamy and the unsettlement of other domestic relations presumably entered upon in innocent reliance upon the jurisdiction of such court."
We do not think it is necessary to find that the petitioner consciously joined in an imposition on the court. It is enough that, not having been imposed on by her husband in respect of her appearance and the jurisdiction of the court (see Sampson v. Sampson, 223 Mass. 451), she appeared and elected not to contest the divorce, and sought and obtained benefits for her son under it, and that an irrevocable change of position of a third party thereafter occurred in presumed reliance thereon. There is no basis for concluding that the second wife had knowledge of the defect in the divorce decree so that there is an offsetting equity to be considered.
future. It does not appear that the promise of the libellant was not made in good faith when made, or that it was made with intent to deter the petitioner from acting to upset the decree. In the circumstances nothing in this finding speaks against significance of the petitioner's acquiescence in the granting of the decree, and in the libellant's status as a divorced person.
Whatever the rights of persons not parties to show the invalidity of the decree in collateral proceedings (see Old Colony Trust Co. v. Porter, 324 Mass. 581, 587-589, 593) it is clear, we think, that the application of the equitable principles heretofore stated by this court bars the relief sought. See Trivanovitch v. Hobby, 219 Fed. (2d) 762. Compare Edson v. Edson, 108 Mass. 590; Sampson v. Sampson, 223 Mass. 451.
We do not need to rule on the effect of lapse of time without any material change of positions in the meantime. See Brigham, petitioner, 176 Mass. 223; Holbrook v. Holbrook, 114 Mass. 568, 570; Meyer v. Meyer, 326 Mass. 491, 493. We also need not decide whether the death of a party to the decree necessarily bars the granting of a petition to vacate. See Brigham, petitioner, 176 Mass. 223, 226-227; Rawson v. Rawson, 156 Mass. 578. The husband's death is, of course, a relevant circumstance in determining the significance of the change of status of the woman who may have supposed she had become his wife.
We see no error in the decree on the facts found by the judge, or as we find them on the evidence. See Heard v. Heard, 323 Mass. 357, 361.

matches: v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v.


text:
1. Removal of Causes — Power to Remove — Effect of Erroneous Judgment For Removal — Judgments — Status of Erroneous Judgment.
An order of the clerk of the Superior Court, having jurisdiction of a motion to remove a cause from the State to the Federal Court for diversity of citizenship under the provisions of 3 C. S., 913(b), that the cause be removed as prayed by the defendants, meeting the requirements of the Federal statutes relating thereto, and made in apt time, is not void, and when improperly made is erroneous.
2. Judgments — Setting Aside for Surprise, Excusable Neglect, etc. — Grounds Therefor — Judgment by Default and Inquiry — Removal of Causes.
Where a cause has been remanded to the State from the Federal Court by the latter court, and the clerk of the former court has had entered, without notice to defendant, a judgment by default and inquiry for the want of an answer, pending the disposition of the cause in the Federal Court, and the order of remand has been regularly made, upon motion of the plaintiff's attorney, the judge of the Superior Court of the State having jurisdiction may set aside the judgment by default and inquiry upon the ground of mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect, upon the showing of a meritorious defense. C. S., 600.
3. Judgments — Setting Aside for Surprise, Excusable Neglect, etc. — Requisites for.
In order for the trial judge to set aside a judgment of the clerk of court, for default of an answer, C. S., 600, the judgment in question must be a valid one, and regularly entered.
4. Removal of Causes — Effect of Removal — Further Proceedings in State Court — Judgments — Setting Aside for Excusable Neglect, etc. — Grounds Therefor.
Where the clerk of the State court has erroneously granted defendant's motion to remove a cause from the State to the Federal Court on the ground of diversity of citizenship under the provisions of the Federal Removal Act, the moving defendants may assume that no further proceedings be had in the State court until the cause has been remanded from the Federal Court, and where a judgment by default and inquiry has been entered therein for the want of an answer, without notice, nothing else appearing to show laches on the part of defendants' attorneys, upon relevant findings of the trial judge, including that of meritorious defense, the action of the trial judge in setting aside the judgment and permitting the defendant to file answer will not be disturbed on appeal.
5. Appeal and Error — Review — Questions of Fact and Findings on Appeal from Order of Removal.
Where there are no exceptions to the evidence introduced, and the facts found thereon are conclusive on appeal to the Supreme Court, and the judge's conclusions of law are alone reviewable on appeal from an order setting aside a judgment on the grounds of the defendants' mistake, surprise, or excusable neglect. C. S., 600.
6. Appearance — What Constitutes General Appearance — Service — Acceptance of Service — Judgments in Rem, in Personam.
Where attachment proceedings in an action against nonresident defendants have been made against their property situate in this State in order to confer jurisdiction on our court, and the defendant has moved here for setting aside a judgment against him for surprise, mistake, excusable neglect, etc., it is a general appearance in our courts, and a submission to their jurisdiction, and a waiver of service of summons, and a judgment rendered in the action against them is not restricted to a judgment in rem, but is also one in personam.
APPEAL by plaintiff from judgment of Midyette, J., rendered as of 12 November, 1927. From PERQUIMANS. Affirmed.
Battle Winslow, Wilcox, Cooke Wilcox, Ehringhaus Hall and McMullan LeRoy for plaintiff.
Garnet, Taylor Edwards and L. I. Moore for defendant, Gregory.
Jesse N. Bowen and Stephen C. Bragaw for defendant, The Davison Chemical Company.
Motion by defendants that judgment by default and inquiry signed by the clerk of the Superior Court of Perquimans County in this action in favor of plaintiff and against defendants, on 26 September, 1927, be set aside and vacated, and that defendants have leave to file answers to the complaint of plaintiff, filed on 12 July, 1927.
From judgment upon the facts found by the judge, setting aside and vacating the judgment by default and inquiry, and directing that defendants be allowed to file answers, in accordance with their motion, plaintiff appealed to the Supreme Court, assigning error based upon her exception to the judgment.
Plaintiff prays judgment in this action that she recover of defendants the sum of $30,888, or some other large sum. She alleges as her cause of action that defendants jointly and collusively committed a fraud upon her with respect to the sale of certain shares of stock of the Eastern Cotton Oil Company, which she had formerly owned, and which she had sold to the defendant, The Davison Chemical Company upon the solicitation of defendant W. N. Gregory. She alleges that said sale was procured by means of certain false and fraudulent representations made to her as a stockholder of said Oil Company, by defendant Gregory, general manager and director thereof, acting therein in his own behalf and in behalf of his codefendant. She alleges that these false and fraudulent representations were made with respect to the price which the defendant Chemical Company had offered and was willing to pay for said shares of stock, and with respect to the true value of the same at the time of the sale.
The action was begun by summons issued by the clerk of the Superior Court of Perquimans County on 25 May, 1927. The original summons was returned by the sheriff of said county, endorsed as follows: "Received 25 May, 1927. Defendants not to be found in my county." Thereupon summons in the action, and warrant of attachment, to be levied upon property of defendants, situate within the State of North Carolina, were duly served by publication. Both the summons and the warrant of attachment were returnable before the clerk of the Superior Court of Perquimans County on 2 July, 1927. Before the return day, to wit, on 27 June, 1927, an order was entered by said clerk extending the time within which plaintiff was required to file her complaint to 1 August, 1927. On said return day attorneys for defendants entered a special appearance, and moved that the action be dismissed for that no complaint had been filed therein. Defendants excepted to the court's denial of this motion.
The complaint was thereafter filed on 12 July, 1927. It is alleged therein that plaintiff is a resident of the city of Norfolk, in the State of Virginia; that defendant, W. N. Gregory, is also a resident of the city of Norfolk, in the State of Virginia, and that the defendant, The Davison Chemical Company, is a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Maryland, with its principal office in the city of Baltimore, in said State.
On 18 July, 1927, after notice to plaintiff, service of which was accepted by her attorneys on 7 July, 1927, Stephen C. Bragaw, an attorney at law, duly licensed and practicing in the courts of this State, entered a special appearance in the action then pending in the Superior Court of Perquimans County, for the defendant, The Davison Chemical Company, and thereupon filed its petition, accompained [accompanied] by bond as required by statute, praying that said court "proceed no further herein except to make an order of removal" from said court to the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of North Carolina, "as required by law, and that the clerk of this court be directed to make up or cause to be made up a transcript of the record herein to be lodged in the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of North Carolina, Elizabeth City Division, as provided by law." With respect to the citizenship or residence of the parties to the action, it is alleged in said petition that plaintiff was at the time of the commencement of this action and is now a citizen of the State of Virginia, residing in the city of Norfolk; that the defendant, The Davison Chemical Company, is not a citizen of the State of North Carolina, but was at the time of the commencement of this action, and is now a foreign corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Maryland, with its principal office in the city of Baltimore, in said State; and that the codefendant of petitioner, W. N. Gregory, is not a citizen of the State of North Carolina, but was at the time of the commencement of the action, and is now a citizen of the State of Virginia, residing in the city of Norfolk, in said State. One of the attorneys for defendant, W. N. Gregory, was advised of the filing of said petition and concurred in the motion of attorney for his codefendant for the removal of the action from the State court to the Federal Court for trial. At the hearing of the motion for removal upon the petition, the clerk of the Superior Court, upon his finding from "the petition and from other papers in the cause" that petitioner was entitled to have the action removed from the State court to the Federal Court for trial, entered an order dated 18 July, 1927, removing the action from the State court to the Federal Court, and directing the clerk of the State court "to make and certify a transcript of the record in the action for transmission to the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of North Carolina, Elizabeth City Division, forthwith." Plaintiff's exception to the overruling of his objection to said order of removal was entered by the clerk at the request of her attorneys. Plaintiff did not appeal from said order. Pursuant to said order of removal, the action was docketed in the District Court of the United States on 6 August, 1927. Thereafter, to wit, on 14 September, 1927, both defendants filed answers to the complaint in the District Court of the United States. No answer had been filed by either defendant in the State court.
On 1 September, 1927, attorneys for plaintiff caused a notice to be served on attorneys for defendants that she would apply to the judge of the District Court of the United States at the next term of said Court to be held at Elizabeth City, on 10 October, 1927, for an order remanding the action to the Superior Court of North Carolina for Perquimans County, upon the grounds set forth in the written motion filed in the office of the clerk of the District Court, a copy of which was attached to the notice served on attorneys for defendants. Upon the hearing of the motion to remand, before the Honorable Isaac M. Meekins, United States District Judge, on 10 October, 1927, it appeared to the Court "that the plaintiff and the defendant, W.N. Gregory, are both residents of the State of Virginia, and that there is no diversity of citizenship between the plaintiff and the defendants within the meaning of U.S. Code, Title 28, sec. 41, subsec. 1 (Jud. Code, sec. 24), and that therefore the District Court of the United States has no jurisdiction of the said controversy and the cause is not removable within the meaning of U.S. Code, Title 28, sec. 71 (Jud. Code, sec. 28)." Order dated 10 October, 1927, was thereupon entered remanding the action to the Superior Court of Perquimans County. Pursuant to said order the clerk of the U.S. District Court, as he was directed therein to do, made out a certified copy of the motion to remand and of the order made upon said motion, together with the answers of the defendants filed in the United States District Court, and forwarded same to the clerk of the Superior Court of Perquimans County.
After notice of plaintiff's motion to remand had been served on attorneys for defendants, to wit, 1 September, 1927, and before said motion had been heard by the judge pursuant to said notice on 10 October, 1927, attorneys for plaintiff appeared before the clerk of the Superior Court of Perquimans County and moved for judgment by default and inquiry, upon the ground that defendants had not filed answers to the complaint in said court. This motion was granted, and the judgment by default and inquiry in favor of plaintiff and against defendants was signed by the clerk on 26 September, 1927. Neither of the defendants had notice, personally or through their attorneys of the motion for such judgment, nor did they know that such judgment had been signed until 31 October, 1927. At the time the judgment by default and inquiry was signed by the clerk of the Superior Court of the State, upon motion of plaintiff's attorneys, her motion, by her said attorneys, to remand the action from the Federal Court to the State court, of which notice had been given to attorneys for defendants, was pending in the Federal Court.
After the said action had been remanded from the Federal Court to the State court, and after due notice to plaintiff defendants, by their respective attorneys, appeared before the judge presiding at the Fall Term, 1927, of the Superior Court of Perquimans County, on 31 October, 1927, for the purpose of moving the court for leave to file answers to the complaint in said court. An examination of the record in the action then disclosed to attorneys for defendants, for the first time, that a judgment by default and inquiry had been signed by the clerk in this action on 26 September, 1927. Defendants thereupon moved in open court that said judgment by default and inquiry be set aside and vacated upon the ground (1) that the same was entered without notice, and was procured by the mistake, surprise, inadvertence and excusable neglect of defendants and their attorneys; (2) that said judgment was signed contrary to the usual and ordinary practice and procedure of the court and was therefore irregular; (3) that the clerk of the Superior Court was without jurisdiction to sign the said judgment on 26 September, 1927, while plaintiff's motion that the action be remanded from the Federal Court to the State court was pending in the Federal Court, and that same was therefore void; and (4) that the time for filing answers to the complaint had not expired on 26 September, 1927.
"1. That the defendant, W. N. Gregory, has not been guilty of any neglect with respect to the filing of his answer in this cause, and that such neglect, if any has occurred, was the neglect of his counsel, was excusable, and arose by inadvertence and mistake, and is not imputable to said defendant, Willis N. Gregory.
2. That the defendant, Davison Chemical Company, has not been guilty of any neglect with respect to the filing of its answer in this cause, and that such neglect, if any has occurred, was the neglect of its counsel, was excusable, and arose by inadvertence and mistake, and is not imputable to the said defendant, Davison Chemical Company.
3. That the said judgment herein attempted to be entered on 26 September, 1927, by H. G. Winslow, clerk of the Superior Court of Perquimans County, is irregular and contrary to the usual course and practice of the court, and was attempted to be entered for want of an answer when the time allowed by law of North Carolina for filing the answers had not expired, and when the cause had been regularly removed, and was pending in the United States District Court.
4. That the said judgment is void because the clerk of the Superior Court of Perquimans County was without jurisdiction to enter it at the time he so attempted."
It was, therefore, ordered and adjudged "in the court's discretion, that said judgment attempted to be entered by the said H. G. Winslow, clerk of the Superior Court of Perquimans County, on 26 September, 1927, be and the same is hereby set aside, vacated and declared void and of no effect."
It was further ordered and adjudged "in the discretion of the court, that defendants and each of them be allowed to file their answers in the above-entitled cause, and the clerk of the Superior Court of Perquimans County is directed to receive and file the same."
It was further ordered "that defendants, and each of them, be permitted to change the caption in the answers now filed with the clerk of the Superior Court of Perquimans County to show that the cause is pending in the Superior Court of Perquimans County, N.C. instead of in the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of North Carolina, and that same shall be marked `Duly Filed' by the clerk of the Superior Court of Perquimans County upon the request of counsel for defendants at any time within twenty days from the date of this order."
To the judgment, signed by consent at Jackson, N.C. on 23 December, 1927, plaintiff duly excepted. Upon her appeal to this Court her only assignment of error is based upon this exception. There are no exceptions to the findings of fact, made by the judge, upon which he rendered the judgment. These findings of fact are, therefore, conclusive upon plaintiff's appeal to this Court. No contention is made by the plaintiff that there was no evidence to support the findings of fact; indeed, the material facts appear on the record and are not in controversy. In Helderman v. Mills Co., 192 N.C. 626, it is said in the opinion for the Court: "There was evidence in support of the findings of fact. They are, therefore, conclusive upon the appeal of plaintiffs to this Court. Whether the conclusions from these facts, to wit, that defendant's neglect to file an answer within the time prescribed by law was excusable, and that defendant has a meritorious defense to plaintiff's cause of action as set out in the complaint, are correct, is a matter of law, and therefore reviewable upon appeal to this Court." Lumber Co. v. Cottingham, 173 N.C. 323; Marion v. Tilley, 119 N.C. 473; Weil v. Woodard, 104 N.C. 94.
Before considering plaintiff's contentions that there are errors in the conclusions of the judge, from the facts found by him, upon which the judgment was rendered, setting aside and vacating the judgment by default and inquiry, and that, therefore, the assignment of error based upon the exception to the judgment should be sustained, it may be well to say that it is not necessary now, in view of the subsequent record, to consider or determine the effect, if any, of the appearances entered in this action, prior to the date of the judgment by default and inquiry, by the respective attorneys for defendants, which were designated at the time by them as "Special Appearances." Subsequent to such appearances, each defendant has applied to the court to have a judgment in the action set aside, and for leave to file an answer to the complaint. They have each thereby entered a general appearance in the action, which for all purposes of jurisdiction is equivalent to personal service of summons. Currie v. Mining Co., 157 N.C. 209. Both defendants, by filing answers to the complaint, pursuant to leave granted by order of the court, made upon their application, have become subject to the jurisdiction of the court to the same extent, and with the same effect as if summons had been personally served upon them. C. S., 490. The court's jurisdiction is no longer dependent upon the attachment nor will plaintiff's recovery, if any, be restricted to a judgment in rem. A judgment rendered in the action will be in personam, as well as in rem, with respect to each defendant.
In view of the conclusion by the judge, upon the facts found by him, in effect that the failure of defendants to file answers prior to the date of the judgment by default and inquiry, was not due to the neglect of defendants, but to the neglect, if any, of their respective attorneys, and that the neglect of the said attorneys to file said answers was excusable and in no event imputable to defendants, who have each a meritorious defense to the action, as disclosed by the answers of the defendants, filed in the Federal Court, after the order of removal had been signed by the clerk of the State court, and before the order remanding the action to the State court had been made by the judge of the United States District Court, it is not necessary for us to consider or to pass upon plaintiff's contentions, upon her appeal to this Court, that there was error in the other conclusions, upon which the judge ordered and adjudged that the judgment by default and inquiry, signed by the clerk on 26 September, 1927, be set aside and vacated, not only the ground of excusable neglect, but also upon the ground that said judgment was void, or at least irregular. If there was no error in the conclusion of the judge that the failure of defendants to file answers in the Superior Court, prior to the date of the judgment by default and inquiry, was due, not to their neglect, but to the neglect of their attorneys, which was excusable, and not imputable to defendants, plaintiff's assignments of error, upon her appeal to this Court, cannot be sustained, and the judgment must be affirmed. It is not required, in order that we may affirm the judgment from which plaintiff has appealed, that we sustain the conclusions of the judge, in accordance with the contentions of defendants, that the judgment by default and inquiry is void, or at least irregular. Although said judgment may be valid and regular in all respects, as contended by plaintiff, both below and here, the judge had the power, conferred by statute — C. S., 600 — if the same was rendered by reason of the mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect of defendants, or of their attorneys, to relieve defendants from said judgment, by vacating and setting same aside. In Helderman v. Mills Co., 192 N.C. 626, it is said, in the opinion for the Court: "C. S., 600, is a highly remedial statute; the relief authorized by the statute ought not to be denied where, as in this case, plaintiff's rights, if any he has, cannot ultimately suffer, and defendant has a meritorious defense, which he seeks only an opportunity to make, and which he would, but for the statute lose through his mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect." In order that relief may be had under the statute, the judgment from which a party seeks relief must be a valid judgment, and regular in all respects. If a party to an action, in which a valid judgment has been rendered, upon his motion in the cause that the same be set aside, sustains his allegation that the judgment was rendered because of either his mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect, he may have such relief as the judge, in his discretion, may grant. Relief from a void or irregular judgment may be had, in proper cases, but not under C. S., 600.
Whether upon the facts found by the judge, in the instant case, the neglect of attorneys for defendants to file answers to the complaint, within the time required by statute, or whether, in any event, such neglect was imputable to defendants, are questions of law; the conclusions of the judge, with respect to these matters are, therefore, reviewable by this Court, upon plaintiff's appeal. The judge has concluded, in effect, from the facts found by him, that the failure of defendants to file answers, in the Superior Court prior to the date of the judgment by default and inquiry, was due to their excusable neglect, within the meaning of the statute. He, therefore, in their exercise of his discretion, granted defendants relief from the judgment by default and inquiry, as he is authorized to do by the statute.
The publication of summons and warrant of attachment in this action was begun on 25 May, 1927. Before the service by publication had been completed, and before the return day, both defendants employed attorneys to appear for and to represent them in this action. In addition to other attorneys, each defendant employed an attorney, residing in this State and duly licensed to practice in its courts. Both these resident attorneys undertook to go to Perquimans County and to appear there for defendants in this action, as well as in other actions against the defendants, involving the same matters as this action, brought by other persons as plaintiffs. Upon the return day of the summons both these resident attorneys appeared in the office of the clerk of the Superior Court of Perquimans County in behalf of defendants. Prior to this time attorneys employed by defendants had corresponded with attorneys of record for plaintiff in this action, with respect to the pleadings to be filed herein. Plaintiff and her attorneys, therefore, knew that defendants had employed attorneys to appear for and to represent them in this action, and that it was their purpose to defend the same. The answer of defendant Gregory appearing in the record was verified by him on 16 July, 1927; that of defendant, Davison Chemical Company, was verified on 9 September, 1927.
It cannot be said that defendants or either of them failed to give this case the attention which a prudent man gives to his important business. On the contrary, they did all that the law does or should require of a defendant. They employed counsel, learned in the law, and skillful and diligent in its practice, whose zeal and fidelity to the cause of a client are unquestioned. They verified their answers promptly when same had been prepared by their attorneys, and entrusted them to their attorneys for filing as required by law. Upon these and other facts found by the judge, it cannot be held that defendant's failure to file the answers, within the time required by law, was due to such negligence on their part as deprived the judge of power to grant them relief under the statute.
When the resident attorneys for defendant appeared in their behalf at the clerk's office, on the return day, they found that the clerk, without notice to them, or to defendants, and prior to such return day, upon motion of plaintiff, had extended the time for filing the complaint to 1 August, 1927. Thereafter, on 18 July, 1927, defendant Davison Chemical Company filed its petition before the clerk for the removal of the action from the State court to the Federal Court. Plaintiff's attorneys did not resist the motion for removal. The clerk had jurisdiction to receive the petition and to hear and pass upon the motion. 3 C. S., 913 (b). When the order of removal was made, plaintiff's exception thereto was entered by the clerk, at the request of her attorneys. Plaintiff, however, did not appeal from said order, as she had the right to do under the statute. After the removal had been effected, plaintiff appeared in the District Court of the United States on 1 September, pursuant to notice to defendants, and lodged a motion in said court that the action be remanded to the State court. This motion pended in the District Court from 1 September to 10 October, when it was heard and allowed by the judge. The order of removal was erroneous, but it does not therefore follow that it was void. The distinction between an order or judgment which is void, and one which is merely erroneous, is clearly stated in Duffer v. Brunson, 188 N.C. 789. The order of removal in the instant case is more than the mere semblance of an order. The clerk had jurisdiction of the parties; the action was then pending in the Superior Court. He had jurisdiction of the petition by the express terms of the statute. His order therefore cannot be held void; it was merely erroneous. It was effective until reversed on appeal, or until the action had been remanded by the order of the judge of the United States District Court. Attorneys for defendants relied upon the order for their assurance that the clerk, having made it, and thereby surrendered jurisdiction of the action, would not undertake any further proceeding therein. Attorneys were justified in giving the action no further attention in the Superior Court, especially in view of the fact that plaintiff's attorneys thereafter invoked the jurisdiction of the Federal Court by their motion to remand. Their failure to file an answer to the complaint in the Superior Court, after the said court had surrendered jurisdiction of the action by removing same to the Federal Court, was at least excusable, even if it was negligent.
At the time this action was begun thirteen other actions were begun in the Superior Court of Perquimans County, all upon the same cause of action, against these defendants. The plaintiffs in these thirteen actions are all residents of the State of North Carolina — all members of either the White or Winslow families, who have long resided in Perquimans County. These families are and have been for many years prominent in the social and business life of Perquimans County. The plaintiff in this action is a member of the White family, but since her marriage has resided in the city of Norfolk in the State of Virginia, and not in Perquimans County, North Carolina. In the preparation of the petitioners for removal of such of the fourteen actions as involved sums in excess of $3,000, defendants' attorneys inadvertently failed to note the fact which distinguishes this case from others of the fourteen which were removed to the Federal Court. This distinction was not brought to the attention of defendants or of their attorneys until 10 October, 1927, when the motion to remand was heard in the United States District Court.

matches: v. v. v. v. v. v. v.