Court Opinion

ID: 9576242
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 21:22:09.090086+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:03:26.061043
License: Public Domain

Opinion of
Mr. Justice HARNSBERGER,
concurring.
I concur in the affirmance. I do not agree that in a case of this kind valid service of summons can be made outside the county wherein the action is brought. This action is not one of those mentioned in Chapter V of Division II of the Code of Civil Procedure, Session Laws of Wyoming, 1886, which is the chapter referred to in § 3-1005, W.C.S. 1945, and by which its provisions are limited. Consequently, service of the summons in this case was not within the authority of that statute. However, appellant confines his objection to the court’s jurisdiction to the question of whether he was or was not a joint tort-feasor. This is a tacit acceptance of the court’s jurisdiction if his views on *199that point are not accepted. They are not. It follows that independent of any attempted service of summons, the court acquired the necessary jurisdiction to render the judgment. For this reason alone, I concur in the result.