602 P.2d 1254 | Alaska | 1979
OPINION
The issue in this case is whether a process server in possession of personal property by reason of a writ of attachment is subject to an action to recover the property brought by a third party claiming an interest superi- or to the lien of the attachment levy. We hold, in accordance with most authorities, that such an action will lie.
The judgment is reversed.
. See Sleeper v. Wilson, 266 Mich. 218, 253 N.W. 274 (1934); Oklahoma State Bank v. Reading, 176 Okl. 253, 55 P.2d 752 (1936); Commercial Credit Corp. v. Dusckett, 114 Vt. 450, 49 A.2d 106 (1946); Confidential Loan & Mortgage Co. v. Hardgrove, 259 Wis. 346, 48 N.W.2d 466 (1951). See also annot. 85 A.L.R. 668 (1933).
. See Alaska R.Civ.P. 19 (Joinder of Persons Needed for Just Adjudication); Alaska R.Civ.P. 21 (Parties may be added by the court on its own initiative).
.See, e. g., Alaska R.Civ.P. 88(f) and 89(g) (Court may require undertaking to indemnify the interest of process server). See also AS 09.40.310 which allows the process server to release the property unless the plaintiff indemnifies him against third party claims.