Sleeper v. Free Bapt. Assoc'n

58 N.H. 27
CourtSupreme Court of New Hampshire
DecidedDecember 5, 1876
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 58 N.H. 27 (Sleeper v. Free Bapt. Assoc'n) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Hampshire primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Sleeper v. Free Bapt. Assoc'n, 58 N.H. 27 (N.H. 1876).

Opinion

Bingham, J.

The defendants are a corporation located in the state. The statute required the writ to be served by an attested copy. Gen. St., c. 204, ss. 12, 14. A service made by summons is insufficient. Bell v. Somerby, 8 N. H. 64; Foster v. Hadduck, 6 N. H. 217; Hayward v. Hartshorn, 3 N. H. 198.

The writ should have been duly served on the defendants twenty-eight days before the court to which it was returnable. Gen. St., c. 204, s. 1.

*28 The defendants could not be legally notified to answer to the action, as ruled at the trial term. Jones v. Smith, 3 N. H. 108 ; Kendrick v. Kimball, 33 N. H. 484; Nelson v. Swett, 4 N. H. 256; Arnold v. Tourtellot, 13 Pick. 172.

Action dismissed.

Stanley, J., did not sit.

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

Related

Chase v. Chase
61 N.H. 123 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1881)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
58 N.H. 27, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sleeper-v-free-bapt-assocn-nh-1876.