Riewold v. Riewold
New Jersey Court of Chancery
1Opinion of the Court
Defendant appears specially by leave of the court and moves to set aside service of the subpoena to answer. He is a resident of Connecticut, and he is also the petitioner in a suit for divorce pending in one of the courts of the State of Virginia. While attending before a notary public at Newark in this state, to give testimony in the Virginia cause, he was served with the subpoena.
Generally, a non-resident party or witness is exempt from the service of process while attending court. Halsey v. Stewart,4 N.J. Law 366; Massey v. Colville, 45 N.J. Law 119; Brown v.Brown, 112 N.J. Eq. 600. The…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Parker v. . MarcoNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
- Burroughs v. Cocke & WillisSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
- Brown v. BrownNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1933
3Cited by5 opinions
- Grober v. KahnNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1962
- Randall v. RandallNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1951
- In Re Subpoena Duces Tecum Inst. Manage. Corp.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1975
- Younger v. YoungerNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1949
- Chambliss v. HaeberleDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1940