Murray v. Murray

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Murray v. Murray

2 D.C. 164

CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals

DecidedJuly 1, 1935

DocketEquity No. 60376

StatusPublished

This text of 2 D.C. 164 (Murray v. Murray) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District of Columbia Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Murray v. Murray, 2 D.C. 164 (D.C. 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

[165]*165MEMORANDUM

ADKINS, J.

A motion is filed my Spencer F. Murray, brother of defendant, to quash the service of process on the ground that it was served on the movant and not on the defendant.

In my opinion movant is not entitled to be heard on this motion; no relief is sought against him. If his motion should be heard and decided adversely that decision would not be binding on defendant. If defendant wishes to raise the question he should do so himself so that any ruling would be binding on him.

The motion will be deified, without prejudice to defendant’s right to raise the question in a proper way.

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

[165]*165MEMORANDUM

ADKINS, J.

A motion is filed my Spencer F. Murray, brother of defendant, to quash the service of process on the ground that it was served on the movant and not on the defendant.

In my opinion movant is not entitled to be heard on this motion; no relief is sought against him. If his motion should be heard and decided adversely that decision would not be binding on defendant. If defendant wishes to raise the question he should do so himself so that any ruling would be binding on him.

The motion will be deified, without prejudice to defendant’s right to raise the question in a proper way.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 D.C. 164, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/murray-v-murray-dc-1935.