Edmonds v. David G. Evans & Co.

182 S.W. 207, 168 Ky. 393, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 566
CourtCourt of Appeals of Kentucky
DecidedFebruary 10, 1916
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 182 S.W. 207 (Edmonds v. David G. Evans & Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Edmonds v. David G. Evans & Co., 182 S.W. 207, 168 Ky. 393, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 566 (Ky. Ct. App. 1916).

Opinion

Opinión of the Court by

Judge Cabboll

— Dismissing appeal;

The appellant brought this suit in the Breathitt Circuit Court against the appellee company, a foreign corporation, and a summons issued against the company was executed by delivering a copy to one C. W. Strong, a traveling salesman or drummer for the company in Breathitt County. The appellee, without entering its appearance to the action, moved the court to quash the return on the summons, and this appeal is prosecuted from the order of the court sustaining this motion. This order was not final or appealable and the appeal must be dis[394]*394missed: Warren v. Smith., 80 Ky., 216; Winn v. Carter Dry Goods Co., 102 Ky., 370.

Bnt in cases like this the. plaintiff, when the summons is quashed, may bring an appeal to this court by pursuing the practice set out in Speckert v. Ray, Judge, 166 Ky., 622, where it was said, in answer to the argument that the plaintiff has no .remedy when the summons is quashed: “If, after the quashing of the return on the summons, she had advised the judge of the circuit court that she proposed taking no further steps, in the case, he doubtless would have entered judgment dismissing the action for want of jurisdiction of the person of the defendant; from which judgment, upon reserving the necessary, exception, she could have taken an appeal to this court and thereby obtained a review of the rulings of the circuit judge complained of.”

And so in this case if, the court after the return on the summons had been quashed and after being advised that the plaintiff did not intend to take any further steps in the case had entered as it might have done a judgment dismissing the action for want of jurisdiction of the person of the defendant, an appeal could have been prosecuted from the order dismissing the case.

The appeal is dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Town of Wallins v. Luten Bridge Co.
163 S.W.2d 276 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1942)
Bastian Bros. Co. v. Field, Judge
134 S.W.2d 648 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1939)
Blanton v. National Seed Co.
264 S.W. 1054 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1924)
Bruch v. Glow Electric Co.
225 S.W. 1062 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1920)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
182 S.W. 207, 168 Ky. 393, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 566, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/edmonds-v-david-g-evans-co-kyctapp-1916.