Court Opinion

ID: 9728965
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 14:20:15.0008+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:25:53.537107
License: Public Domain

Dissenting Opinion by
Mr. Justice Cohen:
I would vacate the decree in this case and disapprove the Rothman case relied upon by the majority. That part of Buie 1503(a) which speaks to the binding of a defendant personally relates only to subsection (2) which permits an action to be brought relating to property located in the county. Thus the appearance or submission to the jurisdiction of the court — assuming that the appearance in former cases can be so construed, upon which I reserve judgment — will only bind the defendant personally if the subject matter of the action is property located within the county. I do not believe that in an action for an injunction against divorce proceedings jointly held property is the subject matter of the action. I have serious questions as to the constitutionality of a “long-arm” statute as interpreted by the majority and therefore dissent.