Legal Opinion

Chittenden & Co. v. Hobbs

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided October 26, 1859PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Appeal from, Delaware District Court; Hobbs as principal, with Mallory and Penn as his sureties, made a joint and several promissory note to plaintiffs. This action was brought against all of them on this note, and an attachment prayed for and issued against Hobbs. In the District Court, Hobbs moved to dissolve the attachment, which motion was sustained.

Read the full summary

Appeal from, Delaware District Court; Hobbs as principal, with Mallory and Penn as his sureties, made a joint and several promissory note to plaintiffs. This action was brought against all of them on this note, and an attachment prayed for and issued against Hobbs. In the District Court, Hobbs moved to dissolve the attachment, which motion was sustained. Neither of the defendants appeared to the main action, and judgment was rendered against them for the amount claimed, with interest. Hobbs and Mallory appeal from this judgment, and the plaintiffs from the order dissolving the attachment.

1Opinion of the CourtWright, C. J.

As to Hobbs, the original notice was returned served as follows: “ Served on C. W. Hobbs, by leaving a copy of this notice at his house, with Miss Hobbs, *419the wife of the within named C. W. Hobbs, she being oyer 14 years of age, this 25th day of January, A. D. 1858.” The return of service on Mallory was substantially the same.

In one respect, at least, this return is defective. To authorize the substituted service, or service by copy left at the residence of defendants, it should appear affirmatively from the return that defendants were not found. Davis v. Burt, 7 Iowa 56; Converse v. Warren, 4…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Davis v. BurtSupreme Court of Iowa · 1858
  2. Bates v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1859
  3. Converse v. WarrenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1856
  4. Bowen v. GilkisonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1859
  5. Pittman v. SearceySupreme Court of Iowa · 1859

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Iowa Valley State Bank v. SigstadSupreme Court of Iowa · 1895
  2. Brooks v. Orchard Land Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1912
  3. Clark v. LittleSupreme Court of Iowa · 1875
  4. W. H. Austin & Co. v. BurgettSupreme Court of Iowa · 1860
  5. Davis v. Cleveland, C., C. & St. L. R.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern Iowa · 1906

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API