Harvie v. Bostic
Mississippi Supreme Court
MENO AH BOSTIC, by his attorney, sued from the clerk’s office of the circuit court for Lowndes, a writ in case upon as-sumpsit, against Daniel Harvie. Upon the writ there was the following endorsement: “ The State of Mississippi, Lowndes county. “I acknowledge service of the within writ, the 31st day of September, 1833. Daniel H ah vie.” Declaration filed in the usual form, and judgment by default at the November term of said court, upon the second day of the term.
Read the full summary
MENO AH BOSTIC, by his attorney, sued from the clerk’s office of the circuit court for Lowndes, a writ in case upon as-sumpsit, against Daniel Harvie. Upon the writ there was the following endorsement: “ The State of Mississippi, Lowndes county. “I acknowledge service of the within writ, the 31st day of September, 1833. Daniel H ah vie.” Declaration filed in the usual form, and judgment by default at the November term of said court, upon the second day of the term. Writ of error to this court, and now it is assigned for error, that the court below rendered a judgment by default, in favor of…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice ShaRkev
The only question in this case is as to the sufficiency of the return of service on this writ. The service, as it appears, is in these words: “State of Mississippi, Lowndes county: I acknowledge service of the within writ 31st day of September, 1833: Daniel Harvie:” which, it is said, is insufficient to justify the judgment by default without proof of the service.
An authority in 1 Bibb is relied on in support of that position; *107but by that authority the judgment would have been equally irregular; if the court had ever received proof of the service of the process in the absence of the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bruner v. KelsoeCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1809