Public Finance Co. v. Jump
Decision Date | 27 April 1943 |
Docket Number | 30869. |
Citation | 136 P.2d 706,192 Okla. 368,1943 OK 162 |
Parties | PUBLIC FINANCE CO. v. JUMP. |
Court | Oklahoma Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
1.In an action for damages in conversion where the defendants are non-residents and it is sought to obtain jurisdiction of funds in the hands of a resident garnishee and serve notice upon the defendants by publication, both the affidavit to obtain service by publication, and the notice by publication must reasonably describe the funds sought to be impounded by the writ of garnishment.
2.Where the plaintiff proceeds by substitute service under the provisions of 12 O.S.1941 § 158, the notice to the non-resident defendants must be as specific as the notice required to be given by publication under the provisions of 12 O.S.1941 § 170.
Appeal from District Court, Osage County; Hugh C. Jones, Judge.
Action for conversion of an automobile by W. L. Jump against Public Finance Company, a copartnership composed of J. E. Crane, C D. Grant, and Anna L. Lewis, and others.Judgment for plaintiff and the named defendants appeal.
Reversed and remanded with directions.
Hamilton & Kane, of Pawhuska, and George Templar, of Arkansas City Kan., for plaintiff in error.
Johnson & Johnson, of Fairfax, for defendant in error.
This action was commenced on the 25th day of February, 1941, by the plaintiffW. L. Jump against Ross Crawford, Farmers State Bank of Burbank, Oklahoma and Public Finance Company of Arkansas City, Kansas, a corporation, to recover $599.30 actual damages and $1,000 exemplary damages for conversion of an automobile.
The proceeding was dismissed as to the Farmers State Bank of Burbank and in the amended petition filed April 23, 1941, the plaintiff named the Public Finance Company, a co-partnership consisting of J. E. Crane, C. D. Grant and Anna L. Lewis together with the defendantRoss Crawford.
Following the filing of the amended petition on April 23, 1941, D. E Johnson, attorney for the plaintiff, filed an affidavit to obtain service by publication stating that plaintiff has filed his petition against said above named defendants alleging damages to him by the action of the defendants and that the Public Finance Company, a co-partnership, composed of J. E. Crane, C. D. Grant and Anna L. Lewis, are non-residents of the State of Oklahoma but have property and debts owing them in the State and County; that the action is brought for damages and garnishment of money and property in the state belonging to said non-resident defendants; that this is one of the classes of cases prescribed by the statutes of Oklahoma in which service by publication may be had.
Notice by publication was published in the Fairfax Chief of Fairfax, Oklahoma, April 24, and May 1, 8, and 15, 1941.The notice is as follows:
On the 8th day of May, 1941, D. E. Johnson, attorney for the plaintiff, filed an affidavit of mailing stating that on the 28th day of April, 1941, copies of the amended petition and the notice by publication were mailed to said defendants by depositing the same in the Post Office at Fairfax, Oklahoma.On the 22nd day of May, 1941, D. E. Johnson filed a garnishment affidavit stating that suit had been brought for $1,599.30 against the Public Finance Company, a co-partnership consisting of J. E. Crane, C. D. Grant and Anna L. Lewis and that Robert Hampton is indebted to said defendants and on the same date a garnishment summons issued to Robert Hampton.On the 27th day of June, 1941, D. E. Johnson filed an affidavit stating that on the 23rd day of May, 1941, he mailed a copy of the summons in garnishment to the Public Finance Company, a co-partnership composed of J. E. Crane, C. D. Grant and Anna L. Lewis by depositing the same in the post office at Fairfax, Oklahoma.On the 8th day of July, 1941, D. E. Johnson filed a garnishment affidavit stating, in substance, the matters formerly stated in his affidavit for garnishment and that Robert Hampton, O. A. Maxey and Ed McGuire were indebted to the Public Finance Company, a co-partnership, consisting of J. E. Crane, C. D. Grant and Anna L. Lewis.On the same date a garnishment summons was issued and served on Robert Hampton, O. A. Maxey and Ed McGuire on July 10, 1941.Return of service recites that a copy of this garnishment summons was served on W. S. Hamilton, attorney for the Public Finance Company, a co-partnership, composed of J. E. Crane, C. D. Grant and Anna L. Lewis on July 14, 1941, by the sheriff of Osage County, Oklahoma.On July 8, 1941, a summons was issued by the court clerk of Osage County, Oklahoma, which is as follows:
This summons was served on each member of the co-partnership July 14, 1941, by the sheriff of Cowley County, Kansas, and is duly verified by the officer serving the same.On the same date a copy of the summons in garnishment issued to Robert Hampton, O. A. Maxey and Ed McGuire on the 8th day of July, 1941, was delivered to each member of the co-partnership comprising the defendantPublic Finance Company.The return on the garnishment summons was not verified by the sheriff of Cowley County, Kansas.
The garnishee, Robert Hampton, answered that he had funds to the extent of $375 and Ed McGuire that he had funds to the extent of $267.88, belonging to the defendants.These funds were by stipulation paid into court to await the action of the trial court.Judgment was returned for $250 actual damages and $100 exemplary damages against Ross Crawford and Public Finance Company, consisting of J. E. Crane, C. D. Grant and Anna L Lewis.The members of the co-partnership constituting the Public Finance Company alone appeal.They shall be referred to hereinafter for convenience as the defendants.The evidence is not included in the case-made and the errors are those of law, dealing solely with the...
To continue reading
Request your trialUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions
-
AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions
-
AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions
-
AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions
-
AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions
-
AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

Start Your 7-day Trial
-
J&J Sports Prods., Inc. v. Spears
...in which the published notice allegedly failed to state the amount claimed. See Reply Br. at 4. Defendant appears to cite Public Finance Co. v. Jump, 1943 OK 162, 192 Okla. 368, 136 P.2d 706, for the proposition that substantial compliance is not met if the notice "fails to specify the amou......