Waterman v. Bash

Citations

• 46 Wash. 212
• 89 P. 556
• 1907 Wash. LEXIS 593

Syllabus

<p>Judgment — Revival—Collateral Attack. In á proceeding to revive a judgment, the jurisdiction of the court may be attacked by answer-and the same is a direct attack on the judgment.</p> <p>Same — Process—Substituted Service — Evidence of Domicile— Sufficiency. In an attack upon a judgment in an action commenced • by service of process at defendant’s uslial place of abode, as stated in the affidavit of service, the evidence is sufficient to show want of jurisdiction from the fact that defendant was a nonresident of the state at the time of service, where it appears that he had not lived there more than a few days each year for four years, during which time he was engaged in business in China or New York, where he lived, neither he nor his wife were living in the state at the time of the service, and the house was occupied by a daughter, to whom it belonged, and a third person to whom copy of process was delivered.</p> <p>Judgment — Revival — Appearance of Defendant — Process — Waiver. The appearance of a defendant to contest the revival of a judgment, void for want of service of process, does not waive service of process in the original action; and he cannot be required to answer the complaint upon entry of a decree setting aside the judgment.</p>