Never have I ever seen a court case decision like this one.
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5565833511701493921&q=
I feel the Abatement is lost because from what I have read, “It cannot be pleaded after making full defence.” 1 Chit. Pl. 441
(6th Lond. ed.)
it goes on to say "A plea in abatement and a plea or answer in bar cannot be pleaded together; Southern Bldg. & Loan Ass’n v. Ins. Co., 23 Pa. Ct. 88;
Based on this document and this court case and looking it up in Bouvier’s Law
Dictionary AUDITA QUERELA looks interesting.
With that said now it's down to decide between A Writ of Error (CORAM Nobis) and the former.
AUDITA QUERELA: a form of action which lies for a defendant to recall or prevent an execution on account of some matter
occurring after judgment amounting to a discharge, and which could not have been, and cannot be, taking advantage of otherwise. Thatcher v. Gammon, 12 Mass. 268.
It is a remedial process, equitable in its nature, based upon facts, and not upon the erroneous judgments or acts of the court;2 Wms. Saund. 148, n.; Lovejoy v. Webber, 10 Mass. 103.
CORAM NON JUDICE: acts done by court which has no jurisdiction either over the person, the cause, or the process are said to be coram non judice
Pursuant to Black's Law dictionary the 6th edition
Coram Nobis have been abolished by Federal rule of civil procedure 60 (b) and superseded by relief as provided by that rule.
Interesting to note the words "Coram Nobis" meaning "our court" as compared to the common law writ of "Coram vobis" meaning "you're court".