Coffin v. Maitland

I disagree with that part of the opinion of the majority holding that jurisdiction was obtained of Martin L. Moore under the provisions of section 25-519, R. S. 1943, by reason of the notice published; and the overruling- in part of the opinion of Armstrong v. Griffith, 94 Neb. 515, 143 N. W. 461.

It should be stated that section 25-519, R. S. 1943, is the identical statute under which Armstrong v. Griffith, supra, was decided.

In order to show the similarity between the two notices involved, the one in this case, which is held sufficient, and the one in the case of Armstrong v. Griffith,…