Lawrence v. Smith
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This action was assumpsit, in which the defendants are described as of the city, county and state of New York. The service endorsed is an attachment of nominal property [a chip] of the defendants, and the leaving of a summons with their attorney, William P. Walker.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
As a plea in abatement to the jurisdiction, the plea is unquestionably bad, as it gives jurisdiction to no other Court of this state. But the Court will not proceed in the suit, as it does not appear that either of the defendants, or any estate of theirs, is within the jurisdiction of the commonwealth.
Let an entry be made that the plea is adjudged bad; and let a further entry be made that, for the reasons aforesaid, all further proceedings stay.
See statute of 1797, c. 50. § L, relating to suits against defendants out of the state, also to giving notice to defendants sued (a).
Vide…
2Cited by23 opinions
- Picquet v. SwanU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1828
- Tingley v. BatemanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1813
- Allin v. Connecticut River Lumber Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890
- Perkins v. PerkinsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1829
- Steward v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1913
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.