Rose v. Northwest Fire & Marine Ins.
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon
■ This was an action by Charles E. Rose, receiver of the Consolidated Mutual Fire Insurance Company of Chicago, 111., against the Northwest Fire & Marine Insurance Company of Portland, Or., fipon a judgment recovered in Illinois. A motion to strike out parts of the answer was denied. • 67 Fed. 439. Plaintiff demurred to the answer and to a counterclaim therein set up.
1Opinion of the Court
BELLINGER, District Judge.
In this case there is a demurrer ,to three several parts of the answer, by which are again raised the same questions heretofore decided on the motion to strike out all the separate defenses set up in the answer. . Upon that hearing it was decided that, in an action on a judgment of another state, the defendant may show, notwithstanding the record to the contrary, that he was not served with process, and that the court did not acquire jurisdiction of his person; that such judgment is conclusive as to all matters going to the merits of the controversy, but .not as to…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Rae v. HulbertIllinois Supreme Court · 1856
- Johnson v. ButlerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1856
- Rankin v. BarnesCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1868
- Rose v. Northwest Fire & Marine Ins.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · 1895
3Cited by1 opinion
- Bailey v. Great Western Oil Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1927