Rutherford v. Moody
This text of 27 S.W. 230 (Rutherford v. Moody) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The appellant sued the appellee before a justice of the peace, and the summons issued by the justice was served by the appellant’s attorney. Moody moved to quash the service upon him, because made by appellant’s attorney. The motion was sustained, and thereupon the cause was dismissed as to Moody, who then tendered to the appellant the amount of his debt, which appellant refused to receive, which Moody thereupon paid into court. The appellant appealed to circuit court, where appellee renewed the motion to quash, which was sustained, and he appealed to this court.
The service of process, in a suit, should be made by . . an mditterent person, and not by a party, or one inter- • ested in the suit, as attorney, or otherwise. Weeks on Attorneys, sec. 122; Ingraham v. Leland, 19 Vt. 304; White v. Haffaker, 27 Ill. 349.
2. As to appearance.
There does not appear to have been any intention upon the part of appellant to appear in the action, and his tender and subsequent payment of the debt into court, was not an appearance to the action.
The judgment is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
27 S.W. 230, 59 Ark. 328, 1894 Ark. LEXIS 66, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rutherford-v-moody-ark-1894.