Legal Opinion
Allder v. Hudson
Superior Court of Delaware
Decided June 7, 1954No. 70PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Carey, J.:
The present motion is based upon the claim that defendant has no “dwelling house or usual place of abode” in Delaware and that the service made in this case does not comply with the requirements of Delaware law.
Service of process is now controlled by Rule 4 of this Court, of which sub-paragraph (f) (1) (I), Del. C. Ann., is substantially the same as Federal Rule 4(d) (I), 28 U. S. C. A. It reads as follows:
“(1) Summons. Service of summons shall be made as follows:
“(I) Upon an individual other than an infant or an incompetent person by delivering a copy of the summons, complaint and…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Rovinski v. RoweCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1942
- Kurilla Ex Rel. Kurilla v. RothSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1944
- McFadden v. ShoreDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1945
- Eckman v. GrearPennsylvania Court of Common Pleas · 1936
- Ruth & Clark, Inc. v. EmerySupreme Court of Iowa · 1943
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Chaplake Holdings, Ltd. v. Chrysler Corp.Superior Court of Delaware · 2001
- Cohen v. Brandywine Raceway AssociationSuperior Court of Delaware · 1968
- Doyle v. JorgensenNevada Supreme Court · 1966
- Fritz v. FritzSupreme Court of Delaware · 1962
- Walsh, Adm'r v. CrouseCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1963
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.