Roanoke Memorial Hospital v. Burton

13 Va. Cir. 452, 1975 Va. Cir. LEXIS 63
CourtVirginia Circuit Court
DecidedOctober 10, 1975
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 13 Va. Cir. 452 (Roanoke Memorial Hospital v. Burton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Virginia Circuit Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Roanoke Memorial Hospital v. Burton, 13 Va. Cir. 452, 1975 Va. Cir. LEXIS 63 (Va. Super. Ct. 1975).

Opinion

By JUDGE ROSCOE B. STEPHENSON, JR.

Mrs. Burton has moved the court to quash the suggestion in garnishment, alleging that both the service of process and the subsequent default judgment recovered against her by plaintiff are void.

The sheriff's return states that Mrs. Burton was not found at her usual place of abode and that the process was delivered to her daughter who was a member of her family above the age of sixteen years. At the time of the service, and for several months prior thereto, Mrs. Burton, having separated from her husband, was not living in the home where the process was delivered. She was residing in the City of Roanoke at that time. She was twenty-five years of age at the time, and her only child, a daughter, was five years of age.

The court, therefore makes the following findings of fact.

1. The service was not made at "her usual place of abode" as required by § 8-51 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended.1

[453]*4532. Even if the place of service had been her usual place of abode, the process was not delivered to a member of her family above the age of sixteen years.

The court holds that since the substituted or constructive service failed to comply with the mandatory provisions of Code § 8-51, the service of process is void, not merely voidable. Furthermore, the default judgment rendered upon a void service of process is likewise void. Fowler v. Mosher, 85 Va. 421, 7 S.E. 542 (1888); Finney v. Clark, 86 Va. 354, 10 S.E. 569 (1889); Staunton Perpetual B. & L. Co. v. Haden, 92 Va. 201, 23 S.E. 285 (1895); Crockett's Admr. v. Etter, 105 Va. 679, 54 S.E. 864 (1906); Washburn v. Angle Hardware Co., 144 Va. 508, 132 S.E. 310 (1926); Narrows Grocery Co. v. Bailey, 161 Va. 278, 170 S.E. 730 (1933); Earle v. McVeigh, 91 U.S. 503 (1875); 44 Va. L. Rev. 654.

Since the judgment is void, Mrs. Burton’s motion to quash the suggestion in garnishment is sustained.

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

Related

Singleton v. Suplizio
74 Va. Cir. 177 (Prince William County Circuit Court, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
13 Va. Cir. 452, 1975 Va. Cir. LEXIS 63, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roanoke-memorial-hospital-v-burton-vacc-1975.