Kierst v. Von Biela
This text of 1 N.Y. City Ct. Rep. 243 (Kierst v. Von Biela) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Marine Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Unless process is personally served upon the defendant, the judgment recovered is regarded as one in rem, and affects only the attached or other specific property sought to be reached (see [244]*244Freeman on Judgments, §§ 127, 567, 573, et seq.). Ho specific property is sought to be reached by the present action, which is an ordinary one upon contract for money loaned. Ho attachment has been issued, and nothing has been seized, upon which a judgment by constructive service (if entered), could be enforced. I need not cite books of practice to show that an order for the publication of the summons, granted under such circumstances cannot stand. It must be set aside. Ho costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1 N.Y. City Ct. Rep. 243, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kierst-v-von-biela-nymarct-1880.