Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)

AIKEN v. THE QUARTZ ROCK MARIPOSA GOLD MINING COMPANY

         JUDGES: The opinion of the Court was delivered by Mr. Justice Terry. Mr. Chief Justice Murray concurred.

         OPINION

          TERRY, Judge

         This was an action against a corporation, by its corporate name. The Sheriff's return shows that the summons was served on " defendant Waddell, who was in possession of the property; " the name of Waddell is not mentioned in the complaint, and it does not appear how he became a defendant, or of what property he was in possession.

         The twenty-ninth section of the Practice Act provides that " if the suit be against a corporation, the summons shall be served on the president, secretary, cashier or managing agent thereof." As Waddell was not shown to be one of the officers named, the judgment by default was improperly entered, and is reversed with costs, and cause remanded for further proceedings.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Aiken v. Quartz Rock Mariposa Gold Mining Co.
(Apr 1, 1856)