Court Opinion

ID: 3379500
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-07-05 18:25:33.126275+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:45:04.492326
License: Public Domain

Upon further consideration of this case, I am inclined to the view that we were in error in our former holding. I concur with Justice Davis that the defect in the verification was not jurisdictional. But I go farther. The Statute is remedial and should be liberally construed. Equity courts had jurisdiction of suits for partition before the statute was enacted. I do not think a defective verification of the bill should be held to be more than a procedural irregularity which did not affect the power of the Court to proceed with the case. The court could have had this *Page 568 
error corrected later, if objections had been raised, and the failure to object amounted to a waiver of the defect.