Harrington v. Loomis
Supreme Court of Minnesota
In August, 1859, defendant, Arphaxed Loomis, commenced a suit in the District Court for Olmsted county, against plaintiff and one Stephen Breden. An order was procured for the service of the summons by publication, upon affidavits, and the summons was so served. On the 14th day of October, 1859, judgment was entered on failure to answer, in favor of the plaintiff in said action; execution was issued and the real estate of said Harrington sold thereunder to Hiram T. Horton.
Read the full summary
In August, 1859, defendant, Arphaxed Loomis, commenced a suit in the District Court for Olmsted county, against plaintiff and one Stephen Breden. An order was procured for the service of the summons by publication, upon affidavits, and the summons was so served. On the 14th day of October, 1859, judgment was entered on failure to answer, in favor of the plaintiff in said action; execution was issued and the real estate of said Harrington sold thereunder to Hiram T. Horton. The plaintiff, Thomas Harrington, commenced this action' against said Loomis and Horton to set aside said judgment, as to…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court —
Berry, J.
— On the 14th day of October, 1859, a judgment on failure to answer was entered up in the District Court for Olmsted county, against Harrington and one Breden, in favor of Arphaxed Loomis.
The summons in the action was served by publication, as upon non-resident defendants.. Harrington did not appear. Execution was issued upon the judgment, and real estate of Harrington sold thereunder to the appellant Horton, The present action is brought by the respondent to set aside the judgment as to himself, and all proceedings under it, and by the judgment of the Court below this…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Huey v. PinneySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1861
3Cited by2 opinions
- Gemmell v. RiceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1868
- DeCorvet v. DolanWashington Supreme Court · 1893