Court Opinion

ID: 8034475
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-09-09 03:19:11.176395+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:37:05.019514
License: Public Domain

Good, J.,
dissenting.
I do not agree to the holding that the record fails to show that plaintiff had made diligent investigation and inquiry *468as to the residence and whereabouts of the defendants. In my view, the evidence is sufficient to show that the statute was complied with. As held by the majority opinion, the affidavit was sufficient in form. It satisfied the trial judge. He ordered service to be had upon defendants by publication. Pursuant to the order, the notice was published. It must have been brought to the attention of the defendants, because they made special appearance in court and objected to the jurisdiction on the ground that they had not been personally served with summons, and that the allegations of the affidavit for service by publication were untrue. ■ The only evidence offered by defendants in support of their objections was an affidavit of one who was a brother-in-law of one of the parties. This affidavit was received in evidence over objection. Oral evidence was taken in court on behalf of the plaintiff, and an examination of the testimony of these witnesses convinces me that sufficient search and inquiry were made to justify the making of the affidavit.
In my opinion the special appearance should have been overruled, the judgment of dismissal reversed, and the cause remanded, with leave to defendants to file an answer setting up any defense they may have, and permitting a trial of the cause upon the merits.