Golden v. The Morning News of New Haven
42 F. 112, 1890 U.S. App. LEXIS 2125
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern New York·Decided March 31, 1890·Published·Cited by 8 cases
Opinion
It has been held in this circuit that service such as this does not confer jurisdiction upon the state court to render a personal judgment against the defendant, and that such judgment, had the case ’not-been removed, would be treated in this court as void. Good Hope Co. v. Railway Barb Fencing Co., 22 Fed. Rep. 635. That decision determines the question raised here. Motion to vacate service of the pro-'éóss is’granted.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Golden v. The Morning News of New Haven, 42 F. 112, 1890 U.S. App. LEXIS 2125 (circtedny 1890).
42 F. 112 (Golden v. The Morning News of New Haven) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Blunda v. Craig
74 F. Supp. 9 (E.D. Missouri, 1947)
McNeal-Edwards Co. v. Frank L. Young Co.
42 F.2d 362 (First Circuit, 1930)
United States Graphite Co. v. Pacific Graphite Co.
68 F. 442 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Michigan, 1895)
Kinne v. Lant
68 F. 436 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Michigan, 1895)
Garner v. Second Nat. Bank of Providence
66 F. 369 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York, 1895)
Wabash Western Ry. v. Brow
65 F. 941 (Sixth Circuit, 1895)
Vermilya v. Brown
65 F. 149 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York, 1894)
American Wooden-Ware Co. v. Stem
63 F. 676 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York, 1894)