Case Name: The E. A. Kinsey Company v. John H. Heimerdinger et al.
Court: Hamilton County Circuit Court
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1909-12-24
Citations: 13 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 195
Docket Number: 
Parties: The E. A. Kinsey Company v. John H. Heimerdinger et al.
Judges: Giffen, P. J.; Swing, J., and Smith, J., concur.
Reporter: Ohio Circuit Court Reports (new series)
Volume: 13
Pages: 195–196

Head Matter:
PROCEEDINGS IN ATTACHMENT.
Circuit Court of Hamilton County.
The E. A. Kinsey Company v. John H. Heimerdinger et al.
Decided, December 24, 1909.
Attachment — Service by Publication — Failure of Justice to Wait One Hour — Voidable Judgments — Appeal—Suing by Initials Instead of Full' Name — Section 6J¡S6.
1. Where a judgment by a justice of the peace is rendered voidable by reason of the fact that tbe justice did not wait one hour for the defendant to appear after the time appointed, and the judgment is reversed by the common pleas court for that reason, the case remains in the common pleas as a case on appeal.
2. Jurisdiction is not defeated in a suit in attachment by reason of the fact that the defendant has been sued by his initials instead of his full name.
Herron, Gatch & James and Roy M. McLaughlin, for plaintiff in error.
Cobb, Howard & Bailey, contra.
Giffen, P. J.; Swing, J., and Smith, J., concur.

Opinion:
The justice of the peace had jurisdiction of the subject-matter and of the person of the defendant by publication under Section 6496, Revised Statutes; and if the record shows that the justice rendered judgment by default without allowing one hour to the defendant in which to appear after the time mentioned in the continuance order under such section, the same was voidable and not void for want of jurisdiction.
The court of common pleas having reversed the judgment of the justice for the reason that one hour was not allowed to defendants, the case is, by force of Section 6733, Revised Statutes, still pending in that court as in cases of appeal.
If it be urged that the justice had no jurisdiction of the defendant because sued as "J. H. Heimerdinger, whose first name is unknown, " it is sufficient to say that without any notice being served upon the defendant, the court would still have jurisdic tion in an attachment suit (Paine v. Moreland, 15 Ohio, 430), although the proceedings would be irregular and reversible.
The petition in error will be stricken from the files.