Legal Opinion

Rutland County National Bank v. Johnson

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided November 25, 1891PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBarker, J.

This is an action of contract. The defendant, a non-resident not served with process, appeared specially and pleaded in abatement facts which he claimed showed that there was no valid attachment of property or service of the writ. Issue was joined on the plea, and at the hearing thereon in the Superior Court the presiding justice refused to rule that the attachment was valid, or that by virtue of it the court had jurisdiction of the cause. The plaintiff excepted to the refusal. The court found that no effectual attachment was made upon the writ, sustained the plea to the jurisdiction, and…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Young v. Providence & Stonington Steamship Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890
  2. Wildes v. MarshallMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Kimball v. SweetMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1897
  2. Guild v. BonnemortMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892

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

Powered by the Exa API