Jump to content

Herndon v. Ridgway

From Wikisource


Herndon v. Ridgway
by John Archibald Campbell
Syllabus
704151Herndon v. Ridgway — SyllabusJohn Archibald Campbell
Court Documents

United States Supreme Court

58 U.S. 424

Herndon  v.  Ridgway

THIS was an appeal from the district court of the United States, for the northern district of Mississippi.

It was a bill filed by Herndon, under the circumstances stated in the opinion of the court, and which was dismissed by the court below.

The process against Davis was served upon Messrs. Dowd and Murphy, his attorneys. A motion was made to dismiss the bill for three reasons, the second of which was:--

'Because Henry Davis is not a citizen of the northern district of Mississippi, and Dowd and Murphy are not his attorneys of redord in any of the courts of the United States, and have not instituted proceedings or suit therein against said Herndon, but are attorneys of record of said Davis, in the circuit court of Monroe county, Mississippi, a state court, as per affidavit on file.' The affidavit was as follows:--

'In open court personally appeared Wm. F. Dowd, one of the firm of Dowd and Murphy, who made oath that Dowd and Murphy are not the attorneys of record of Henry Davis, and have not been, as such, to institute any suit in this court, or any one of the federal courts of the United States, against Edward Herndon, for the recovery of the property mentioned in the bill filed in this cause; but they, said Dowd and Murphy, are the attorneys of record of Henry Davis to prosecute a suit against said Herndon, is a State court, to wit: the circuit court of Monroe county, in the State of Mississippi.

'W. F. DOWD.'

The district court dismissed the bill, and Herndon appealed to this court.

The case was argued by Mr. Adams, for the appellant, who contended that service upon the attorneys was sufficient; and by Mr. Phillips, for the appellees, who contended that it was not, and referred to 3 Bro. C. C. 521; 2 Cox. 389.

Mr. Justice CAMPBELL delivered the opinion of the court.

Notes

[edit]

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).

Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse