Big Vein Coal Co. of W. Va. v. Read

Citations

• 229 U.S. 31
• 33 S. Ct. 694
• 57 L. Ed. 1053
• 1913 U.S. LEXIS 2420

Syllabus

<p>A Circuit Court of the United States has no jurisdiction to issue an order of attachment in a case where no personal service can be had upon the defendant and where there has been no personal appearance in the action.</p> <p>Neither under § 915, Rev. Stat., nor under any provision of the act of March 3, 1887, as amended August 13, 1888, can the auxiliary remedy by attachment be had in a Circuit Court of the United States where that court cannot obtain jurisdiction over the defendant personally.</p> <p>An attachment is still but an incident to a suit and unless jurisdiction can be obtained over the defendant, his estate cannot be attached in a Federal court.</p> <p>This court will not construe an amendment to the judiciary statute as making such a radical change as granting a new remedy unless provision is clearly made for making the remedy effective; and so held, that as Congress did not in the act of March 3,1887, as amended August 13, 1888, make any provision for service by publication,- the act will not be- construed as giving jurisdiction to Federal courls-to grant attachments in cases where the defendant cannot be served.</p> <p>In the Federal courts an appearance may be made for the sole purpose of raising jurisdictional questions without thereby submitting to the jurisdiction of the court over the action; and where, as in this case, no issue involving the merits was made, a special appearance to object to the jurisdiction does not give the court jurisdiction to issue an attachment.</p>