Case Name: Wilcox et al. v. Monday
Court: Supreme Court of Indiana
Jurisdiction: Indiana
Decision Date: 1882-05
Citations: 83 Ind. 335
Docket Number: No. 9078
Parties: Wilcox et al. v. Monday.
Judges: 
Reporter: Indiana Reports
Volume: 83
Pages: 335–336

Head Matter:
No. 9078.
Wilcox et al. v. Monday.
Partition. — Practice.—Summons.—Return Day. — In an action for partition, the summons may he returnable for a day later than the first of the term, and service ten days before the return day will give jurisdiction of the person.
Same. — Commissioners’ Oath. — County Surveyor. — If one of the commissioners to make partition be the county surveyor, he may administer the oath to the others.
Same. — Apportionment of Costs. — The costs of a partition proceeding may, in the discretion of the court, be apportioned according to the respective interests of the parties.
Pbactice. — Default.—Questions on Appeal. — Defendants duly served with process, who .permit judgment to go by default, without saving any exception, can raise no question on appeal except the sufficiency of the complaint or the jurisdiction of the court.
From the Hendricks Circuit Court.
C. C. Nave, for appellants.
D. E. Williamson and A. Daggy, for appellee.

Opinion:
Woods, J.
Judgment of partition by default in an action commenced in term time. It is claimed that the service of the summons in such a case by copy left at the residence of the party is not authorized. The contrary was decided in Dunkle v. Elston, 71 Ind. 585. See, also, Hite v. Fisher, 76 Ind. 231.
The record shows that the oath was administered to two of the commissioners appointed to make the partition by the third, who was the county surveyor. There was no error in this. See section 10 of act concerning county surveyors, 1 R. S. 1876, p. 866; R. S. 1881, section 5957.
The court apportioned the costs of the partition among the parties according to their respective interests. This the statute leaves to the discretion of the court. 2 G. & H., p. 366, section 28.
It may be remarked that the appellants, having, after due service of process, permitted judgment to go by default, and having saved no exception to any part of the proceedings, are not in a position to make any question which does not go to the jurisdiction of the court, except that the complaint does not state facts sufficient.
Judgment affirmed, with costs.