Lapham v. Tarabusi
Opinion
Plaintiffs brought summary proceedings against defendants. There was judgment for plaintiffs. Defendants bring error claiming want of jurisdiction because of no personal service of summons on defendants. The attorneys for the parties stipulated in writing to continue the case from August 6, 1928, to August 13, 1928. Such stipulation for continuance amounts to a general appearance. *Page 381
4 C. J. p. 1345; Waldron v. Palmer,
NORTH, C.J., and FEAD, FELLOWS, WIEST, CLARK, McDONALD, and SHARPE, JJ., concurred.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
225 N.W. 483 (Lapham v. Tarabusi) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.