Legal Opinion
Paxson v. Crowson
Superior Court of Delaware
Decided January 21, 1952No. 728 Civil Action 1949PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Carey, Judge:
The question is whether or not the “substitute” service in this case meets the requirements of the quoted statute. A review of the Delaware cases dealing with the act is unnecessary; they all agree that it must be strictly construed and that the method provided by it for obtaining jurisdiction must be confined to the cases and exercised in the way indicated by it. Webb Packing Co. v. Harmon, 9 W. W. Harr. 22, 196 A. 158; McLean Trucking Co. v. Stover, 87 A. 2d 879, not yet reported [in State Report].
It will be seen that one requirement of the Code provision is the filing of a…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Wise v. HerzogCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1940
- Webb Packing Co. v. HarmonSuperior Court of Delaware · 1937
- Syracuse Trust Co. v. KellerSuperior Court of Delaware · 1932
- Creadick v. KellerSuperior Court of Delaware · 1932
- McLean Trucking Co. v. StoverSuperior Court of Delaware · 1951
3Cited by14 opinions
- Monacelli v. GrimesSupreme Court of Delaware · 1953
- Lendsay v. CottonDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1960
- Boyles v. BoylesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- Emery Transportation Company v. BakerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1963
- Hicks v. HamiltonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1955
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.