North v. McDonald
U.S. Circuit Court for the Northern District of Illnois
Attachment, with personal service, tried by the court. Upon an affidavit alleging that the defendant concealed himself so that ordinary process could not be served upon him, a writ of attachment was issued on the 11th of March, 1853, and on the 15th served on property of the defendant in DeWitt county, and on the 11th of April personally served on defendant.
Read the full summary
Attachment, with personal service, tried by the court. Upon an affidavit alleging that the defendant concealed himself so that ordinary process could not be served upon him, a writ of attachment was issued on the 11th of March, 1853, and on the 15th served on property of the defendant in DeWitt county, and on the 11th of April personally served on defendant. The defendant was a citizen of this state, a resident of Chicago, and had kept a store here, until immediately prior to the issuing of the writ. He had then transferred his stock to a brother who went into possession. The evidence showed…
1Opinion of the Court
DRUMMOND, District Judge.
The defendant being a citizen of this state and the plaintiff a citizen of another state, and as the attachment was not only served on property, but the defendant was also personally served with process, in accordance with the rule laid down in Toland v. Sprague, 12 Pet [37 U. S.] 300, and the act of congress of March 14, 1848 (9 Stat. 213) this court can take cognizance of the case. There is no doubt there must be an intentional concealment to avoid the service of process, and the question is did the intention exist in this case coupled with the actual concealment or…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Morgan v. AveryNew York Supreme Court · 1850
3Cited by4 opinions
- Cook v. FoleyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1907
- Bucyrus Co. v. McArthurDistrict Court, M.D. Tennessee · 1914
- Lovejoy v. Hartford Fire Ins.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1882
- Malone v. Handley, Reeves & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1886