Peabody v. Hamilton
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract brought in this court, on an account annexed for £100,000. The writ, dated October 17, 1867, was framed to attach the goods or estate of the defendant, and for want thereof to take his body, but no affidavit and certificate were annexed to justify an arrest under the Gen. Sts. c. 124, § 1. It described the plaintiffs as of London in England, and the defendant as of the state of New York and commorant of Boston in this Commonwealth ; and was indorsed by Charles G.…
Read the full summary
Contract brought in this court, on an account annexed for £100,000. The writ, dated October 17, 1867, was framed to attach the goods or estate of the defendant, and for want thereof to take his body, but no affidavit and certificate were annexed to justify an arrest under the Gen. Sts. c. 124, § 1. It described the plaintiffs as of London in England, and the defendant as of the state of New York and commorant of Boston in this Commonwealth ; and was indorsed by Charles G. Thomas. The following is a copy of the officer’s return of its service: “ Suffolk, bs. Boston, October 25, 1867. By virtue…
1Opinion of the CourtWells, J.
That both parties are foreigners is no ground for dismissing the writ. Roberts v. Knights, 7 Allen, 449. It is not necessary that a foreign plaintiff should be personally within the jurisdiction, in order to institute an action. The statute requires only that he shall furnish an indorser to his writ, who is an inhabitant of the state. Gen. Sts. c. 123, § 20.
Personal actions, of a transitory nature, may be maintained in any jurisdiction within which the defendant is found, so that process is legally served upon him. Story Confl. Laws, §§ 543, 554. Barrell v. Benjamin, 15 Mass. 354. Wright v.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Buckles v. LambertCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1863
- Barrell v. BenjaminMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1819
3Cited by38 opinions
- Burnham v. Superior Court of Cal., County of MarinSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Universal Adjustment Corp. v. Midland Bank, Ltd., of LondonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1933
- Mulhall v. FallonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1900
- Schinkel v. Maxi-Holding, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1991
- Ronson Art Metal Works, Inc. v. Brown & Bigelow, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1952
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.