Crichton v. Wingfield,
258 U.S. 66 (1922)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Crichton v. Wingfield, 258 U.S. 66 (1922)

Crichton v. Wingfield

No. 312

Submitted December 16, 1921

Decided February 27, 1922

258 U.S. 66


1. As a basis for service upon an absent defendant under Jud.Code, § 57, personal property must be properly localized within the district of suit. P. 258 U. S. 74.

2. Promissory notes, secured on land in Mississippi and payable there, were claimed by C as legatee under wills of the payees of which she had been made executrix by a Mississippi probate court which had found, upon her representations, that the deceased were

Page 258 U. S. 67

citizens of that state and that the personal property bequeathed was located within its jurisdiction. Before qualifying as executrix, C removed the notes to New York, of which she was citizen, and there, while the probate proceedings were pending, brought suit in a federal court to quiet her title to them against a citizen of Mississippi who claimed under assignment from one of the decedents. Held that the notes had not such a status as personal property in New York as would justify foreign service under Jud.Code § 57.


Direct appeal from a Judgment of the district court quashing a service of process and dismissing the bill of the appellant for want of jurisdiction.

Page 258 U. S. 69

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.