DeCorvet v. Dolan
Washington Supreme Court
Appeal from Superior Court, Thurston County.
1DissentStiles, J.
I do not think that it was within the power of the" territorial legislature to enact the bald rule which the court in this case has enforced. A resident of the territory under the act of 1877 was entitled to personal service of summons issued in a case brought against him, or, at least, to have the summons left with some suitable person at his dwelling house or usual place of abode; and a non-resident was entitled to precisely the same treatment, if he could be found within the limits of the jurisdiction of the court.
It is inseparable from any showing of non-residence by which a plaintiff…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Forbes v. HydeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
- Ricketson v. RichardsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
- Carleton v. . CarletonNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Alderson v. MarshallMontana Supreme Court · 1888
- McCracken v. . FlanaganNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.