Court Opinion

ID: 9532818
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 04:25:02.254694+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:28:50.954019
License: Public Domain

DAVISON, Justice
(dissenting).
I am unable to agree with the majority opinion. I am of the opinion that the judgment of the trial court is reasonably supported by the evidence.
We have held that the testimony of the officer serving the summons must be met by the oath of two witnesses, or at least one with strong corroborating circumstances. Pettis v. Johnston, 78 Okl. 277, 190 P. 681, 692, and Canard v. Ryan, 172 Okl. 339, 45 P.2d 122.
Two of plaintiff’s counter-affidavits subr stantially corroborate that defendant worked in a smelter in Henryetta- for 10 years and lived there during the working days of the week; spent the weekends in Quinton to see his parents and friends; and for 6 months prior to service of summons rented and lived in an apartment in Henryetta, Oklahoma.
Also to constitute a person a “member” of a “family” in the present situation, there must be permanent and continuous .residence together in the same domestic establishment. 42 Am.Jur., Process, p. 52, Sec. 63. See also Jackson v. Smith, 83 Okl. 64, 200 P. 542.
I,therefore, respectfully dissent.