See In re Protest of Gypsy Oil Co., [ 141 Okla. 291 285 P. 671 supra; Eaton, County Treasurer, v. St. Louis-S. F. Ry. Co., 122 Okla. 143, 251 P. 1032; Protest of Chicago, R.I. P. Ry. Co., 151 Okla. 129, 2 P.2d 935; Oklahoma City v. McWilliams, 108 Okla. 268, 236 P. 417; and Faught v. City of Sapulpa, 145 Okla. 164, 292 P. 15. "The merging of an invalid claim into a judgment does not validate the claim, but a judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction, which is shown by the judgment roll to be valid, is valid against a collateral attack, even though the claim sued on in the action was invalid.
It is contended by plaintiff that by filing the answer after the judgment had been entered, defendant had thereby entered a general appearance for all purposes which related back to the rendition of the judgment and thereby validated same. In Oklahoma City v. McWilliams, 108 Okla. 268, 236 P. 417, it was held: "A judgment against a municipal corporation rendered without service being had upon said municipal corporation as provided by section 243, Comp. St. 1921, and without service of summons being waived or accepted by anyone authorized to accept service or waive same is invalid."
But counsel for defendant contends that the municipal counselor is without authority to waive such a privilege so as to bind a municipal corporation. The case of Oklahoma City v. McWilliams, 108 Okla. 268, 236 P. 417, is cited in support of this contention. In the McWilliams Case a number of suits were brought against Oklahoma City by certain police officers for salaries alleged to be due them in a justice of the peace court.
1983); OKLAHOMA RAILWAY CO. V. BOYD, 282 P. 157 (OKL.1929); OKLAHOMA CITY V. MCWILLIAMS, 236 P. 417 (OKL.1925). THIS VIEW IS CONSISTENT WITH THE STATUTE DEALING WITH CONFLICTS BETWEEN CITY CHARTERS AND GENERAL MUNICIPAL LAWS. SEE, 11 O.S. 13-109 (1981) (PROVISIONS IN A SPECIFIC CHARTER CONTROL OVER GENERAL LAWS GOVERNING MUNICIPALITIES).