Appeal from the District Court of the City and County of Denver Honorable Morris B. Hoffman, Judge No. We reverse and remand. The facts are not in significant dispute.
Plaintiffs are husband and wife.
The wife was injured in an automobile accident in which her car was struck by the car operated by defendant s insured, and her husband asserted a derivative claim for loss of consortium. The insured, an exchange student from Japan, reported the accident to defendant, gave a statement, and apparently returned to Japan before the complaint was filed. The record reveals that plaintiffs made an unsuccessful effort through domestic sources to obtain an address for defendant s insured in Japan, including through the enrollment office of the university he was attending and the Japanese Consulates in Denver and San Francisco. It is apparently conceded that no effort was made in Japan to locate the insured there and that he was not personally served. Plaintiffs then amended their complaint to state a quasi in rem cause of action against the insurance policy issued by defendant and sought to attach the policy pursuant to C.R.C.P. 102, asserting that it was property of the insured in the possession of defendant and thus subject to attachment under the provisions of that rule.