Campbell v. Campbell

Citations

• 63 Ill. 462

Syllabus

<p>1. J usisdicTion—how obtained by infant defendants. In a proceeding for partition, in which the lands of infant defendants were ordered to be sold, there was no actual service of process on the infant defendants, but the court appointed a guardian ad litem, who answered for them: Held, that the court had no jurisdiction of the persons of such defendants.</p> <p>3. Infant defendants. Although the forty-seventh section of the chancery statute seems to authorize a decree against infant defendants without service of process on them, yet the court holds that the legislature has not the power to authorize a court to take the title of any one without notice, actual or constructive, to appear and defend.</p> <p>3. Constitutional law—what is due process of law. The words “due process of law,” in the clause of the constitution forbidding the divestiture of title except by due process of law, has reference to judicial proceedings according to the course and .usage of the common law, which must always be based upon notice. The appointment of a guardian ad litem for an infant defendant, who has had no notice of the suit, is not due process of law.</p>