Ley v. Pilger
Decision Date | 03 January 1900 |
Docket Number | 9,065 |
Citation | 81 N.W. 507,59 Neb. 561 |
Parties | KARL LEY v. ADAM PILGER ET AL |
Court | Nebraska Supreme Court |
ERROR from the district court of Stanton county. Tried below before EVANS, J. Affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
Brome & Burnett, for plaintiff in error.
John A Ehrhardt, contra.
Adam Pilger and Fred Feyerherm sued Karl Ley in the county court of Stanton county to recover $ 280, claimed to be due upon a note and account. The summons was issued and served on April 21, and was made returnable on the first day of the following month, which was the first day of the May term. The defendant made no appearance in the action, and on May 2 judgment was rendered against him by default. He afterwards prosecuted error to the district court, where the judgment of the county court was affirmed. We are of opinion that the judgment of affirmance is right, and that there is no error in the record brought here for review. The case being within the enlarged jurisdiction of the county court, the issuance, service and return of the summons was regulated by section 8, chapter 20, Compiled Statutes, 1899, which is as follows: Only nine days intervened between the 21st day of April and the first day of the May term, and, therefore, under the provisions of the section quoted, the summons should have been made returnable on the first Monday in June.
It is contended by counsel for Ley that the process issued by the county judge was unauthorized and void; that the county court did not acquire jurisdiction of the person of the defendant and that the judgment pronounced is a nullity. The opinion in Crowell v. Galloway, 3 Neb. 215, contains some expressions which seem to countenance the claim that the commission of an error in fixing the answer day or the return day of a summons, would make the writ void; but no such question was decided in that case. In Clough v. McDonald, 18 Kan. 114, and in Swerdsfeger v. State, 21 Kan. 475, it was held that the insertion of an erroneous return day in a summons renders the process irregular, but not void. This we think the...
To continue reading
Request your trial