Case ID: miss_6/html/0012-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Coleman et al. v. Tidwell.
    A copy, of the citation left at the office of the attorney, is not a sufficient service.
    The law requires, that the* citation should be tested in the name of the Chief Justice of the appellate court.
    MOTION to dismiss for want of legal citation.
   Per Curiam.

Two objections have been taken to the citation in error in this case: 1. It is tested in the name of the judge of the circuit court, when the. law requires that it should-be tested in the name of the Chief Justice of this court. ■ 2. That the service is insufficient. There is no doubt that the process is formally defective on account of its title. And' yét we are not prepared to say, that if it appeared to be duly served, we should regard it as a nullity on that account. But the return of service by the officer, who states merely that he left a copy of the writ at the office of the attorney,” is clearly insufficient, and the motion must be sustained.