Lore v. Citizens Bank of Winslow
Arizona Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtRoss, J.
The question for decision is a very narrow one. It is, May a debtor, who in a supplemental proceeding under section 4236 et seq., Revised Code 1928, is ordered by the court to appear and answer before the court concerning his property, appear generally in response to such order and thereafter move that the judgment against him be vacated on the ground that he was not served with process and the court was without jurisdiction! or does such appearance waive all objections to the jurisdiction of his person!
The record shows that defendant, Lore, was not served with summons and did not appear…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Bennett v. Supreme Tent of the Knights of the Maccabees of the WorldWashington Supreme Court · 1905
- Godfrey v. ValentineSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1888
- Woodham v. AndersonWashington Supreme Court · 1903
- Hammond v. 8th Jud. Dist. Ct., N.M.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1924
- Cooke v. CookeUtah Supreme Court · 1926
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- D. W. Onan & Sons, Inc. v. Superior CourtArizona Supreme Court · 1947
- Safeway Stores, Inc. v. RamirezArizona Supreme Court · 1965
- Safeway Stores, Inc. v. RamirezArizona Supreme Court · 1965
- Jizmerjian v. Department of the Air ForceDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 1978
- McMahan v. GrasshopperArizona Supreme Court · 2026
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.