116 Me. 406 | Me. | 1917
The writ in this action was served on the defendant, a non-resident, while he was attending court in this State, as a party and witness. Claiming to be exempt from service, while so attending court the defendant by his attorney seasonably filed a plea in abatement. The presiding Justice overruled a demurrer to the plea, and the case is before the court on exception to this ruling.
In Guild, Admr., vs. Richardsin, Admr., 6th of Pickering, 364, the defendant in a writ was named as resident of a town not within the Commonwealth, and the officer returned that he had attached all of the defendant’s interest in a parcel of land, and had left a summons at the place of his last and usual abode when in the Commonwealth. The defendant pleaded by attorney that he had no interest in the land, and prayed that the writ might abate and for his costs. The court held that the plea was a plea to the writ and not the jurisdiction of the court. The court says as follows: “This plea was well pleaded by the attorney. If it had been a plea to the jurisdiction, the reasoning of the plaintiff’s counsel would have been conclusive. So, according to the English practice, misnomer cannot be pleaded by attorney; but other pleas in abatement may be so pleaded, and such is the uniform practice. By appearing by an attorney of the court, the defendant admits its jurisdiction, but not that the writ is good, or the service sufficient.”
Exceptions overruled.