McKee v. Harris
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from the Johnson District Court. - Bill in chancery. The process served upon the respondents reads as follows : “ The State of Iowa, “ To the sheriff of Johnson county, greeting:— “In tbe name of the state of Iowa, we command you to summon Sybil Harris, and Sterling Stagg, if to be found in your county, to be and appear before the District Court of said county, on the first day of the next term thereof, to be begun and held at the court-house in Iowa city, on the…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Johnson District Court. - Bill in chancery. The process served upon the respondents reads as follows : “ The State of Iowa, “ To the sheriff of Johnson county, greeting:— “In tbe name of the state of Iowa, we command you to summon Sybil Harris, and Sterling Stagg, if to be found in your county, to be and appear before the District Court of said county, on the first day of the next term thereof, to be begun and held at the court-house in Iowa city, on the second Tuesday in April, 1855, to answer unto Francis McKee, a complainant in chancery, in a suit on the chancery side of…
1Opinion of the CourtWoodward, J.
(Weight, C. J., dissenting). — Tbe only-question in tbe cause, is whether tbe process by which tbe defendants are called into court, is a legal and sufficient one. Tbe court entertains no doubt, that it is good under the practice and proceedings as they existed prior to tbe enactment of tbe Code. Tbe regular technical process in chancery was tbe subpoena. The statute of 1843, 107, directs a summons to be issued to tbe defendant, commanding him to appear, &c. This writ is more in tbe nature of a summons than of a subpoena. But we think either of those processes, would be good under that…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Baldwin v. KounsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1886