Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

pearance for all the parties. Hall v. Lanning, 91 U. S., 160.

Process from the tribunals of one State can not run into another State and summon a party there domiciled; and publication of process within the State can not summon him to appear. A judgment obtained on such service may be sufficient to dispose of the property of the defendant brought by seizure or some equivalent act within the control of the court; but as to the absent defendant's personal rights and obligations it is ineffectual. A judgment against him personally for the recovery of money, rendered upon such constructive service, is not entitled to credit in the Federal courts or courts of other States. Pennoyer v. Neff, 95 U. S., 714.

Where, by the State law, constructive service by publication of summons or process is provided, and upon such service the court is authorized to adjudicate upon the rights of the absent party, strict compliance with the statutory mode of service must be observed. Galpin v. Page, 18 Wall., 350.

Where B, a citizen of Maryland, had executed a bond, with a warrant authorizing any attorney of any court of record in the State of New York or any other State to confess judgment for the penalty, and judgment having been entered in Pennsylvania under local law, without service of process or appearance of attorney or in person by the defendant, the courts of Maryland were

not bound to give faith and credit to such judgment. Grover, etc., Mch. Co. v. Radcliffe, 137 U. S., 287.

This provision "establishes a rule of evidence rather than of jurisdiction." "It does not make the judgments of other States domestic judgments to all intents and purposes, but only gives a general validity, faith and credit to them as evidence. No execution can issue upon such judgments without a new suit in the tribunals of other States. And they enjoy not the rights of priority or lien, which they have in the State where they are pronounced." See Wisconsin v. Pelican Co., 127 U. S., 292. "To give it force of a judgment in another State it must be sued upon and made a judgment there and can only be executed as its laws may permit." M'Elmoyle v. Cohen, 13 Pet., 312, 325.

As to public acts, records and judicial proceedings, this clause requires that the same effect be given them that by law and usage they have at home. Chicago, etc., R'y Co. v. Wiggins, 119 U. S., 615.

A statute which declares that "no action shall be maintained on any judgments or decree rendered without the State against one who was at the time a resident of the State passing the law, is void as in conflict with the full faith and credit clause. Christmas v. Russell,

5 Wall., 290.

Records and judicial proceedings of each State, so far as they affect property in that State, must be given the same force and effect in other States that they have at

[ocr errors]

home; but as to similar property elsewhere they have no greater effect than similar records or proceedings of the State not of origin. Robertson v. Pickrell, 109

U. S., 608.

The power of a will is determined by the law of the State where the land lies. If admitted to probate in another State, the validity of the devise is determined not by the judgment of probate but by the lex rei sitae (the law of the site of the land). Robertson v. Pickrell, 109 U. S., 608.

The laws of another State, in order for the court of a State to give them full force and credit, must be proved as a fact. Chicago, etc., R'y Co. v. Wiggins Ferry Co., 119 U. S., 615.

A judgment of one State has the same effect as a domestic judgment of another State, under this clause, only so far as to preclude all inquiry into the merits. M'Elmoyle v. Cohen, 13 Pet., 312.

The probate of a will is not conclusive abroad to any farther extent than in the State where granted. Darby's Lessee v. Mayer, 10 Wheat., 465.

The judgment of one State is conclusive evidence in another, although commenced by attachment of property, the defendant having afterwards appeared and defended. Mayhew v. Thatcher, 6 Wheat., 129.

Nil debet (that he does not owe) is not a good plea to an action founded on a judgment of another State. Mills v. Duryee, 7 Cranch, 481.

The judgment of a State court has the same credit, effect and validity in every other court, within the United States which it had in the State where rendered, and only such pleas as could be made to it there can be made elsewhere. Hampton v. M'Connel, 3 Wheat., 234; Hanley v. Donoghue, 116 U. S., 1.

An action of debt will not lie against an administrator in one State, on a judgment recovered against a different administrator of the same intestate appointed in another State, under its authority. Stacy v. Thrasher, 6 How., 44. There is no privity between the two administrators. Id.

Statutes of limitation may bar judgments obtained in other States. B'k of Ala. v. Walton, 9 How., 522. When A is sued in one State upon an assessment or call upon stockholders made in another State, made by the court in winding up the corporation, and A pleads the general statute of limitations of the State where the suit is brought, no Federal question as to faith and credit is raised. Great Western Tel. Co. v. Purdy, 162 U. S., 329.

A, B, and C resided in New York. A owed both B and C severally. He gave a mortgage on chattels in Illinois to secure B, but the same was not recorded, which by the laws of Illinois was essential to validity, as also was delivery. C attached the property in Illinois and levied upon and sold it. B was no party to this proceeding and did not intervene; but sued C in New

York for converting the property. C pleaded in bar the proceeding in Illinois, which plea was overruled by the State court. This was in violation of the full faith clause. Green v. Van Buskirk, 7 Wall., 139.

A court of equity may enjoin a creditor (who is within its jurisdiction) from prosecuting his debtor in another State, when proceedings have been instituted against the debtor, under a general State insolvent law; and the creditor attaches property in another State, which the insolvent law requires the debtor to transfer to his assignee for distribution. Cole v. Cunningham, 133 U. S., 107.

The mere construction of a statute of a State, without denying its validity, does not deny it full faith and credit; especially where no decision in the State where the statute was enacted is in conflict with such construction. Glenn v. Garth, 147 U. S., 360.

One who holds bonds of one State may be taxed upon them in another, where he resides.

not violate this full-faith clause.

Court, 104 U. S., 592.

Such taxation does

Bonaparte v. Tax

Whether a State court has denied full faith and credit to the judicial proceedings of another State is a Federal question; and whether the statute of a State is of a penal nature so that another State will not give it effect, will be determined by the Supreme Court of the United States. Huntington v. Attrill, 146 U. S., 657. A statute making a stockholder liable for all the debts

« AnteriorContinuar »