The privilege from service of summons ac corded to suitors going to, attending, or re turning from court, extends to both residents and non-residents ; Barber v. Knowles, 771 Ohio St. 81, 82 N. E. 1065, 14 L. R. A. (N. S.) 663, 11 Ann. Cas. 1144 ; but it is held that a non-resident coming into the state to attend trial upon an indictment is not exempt from service of process in a civil suit; Netograph Mfg. Co. v. Scrugham, 197 N. Y. 377, 90 N. E. 962, 27 L. R. A. (N.. S.) 333, 134 Am. St. Rep. 886. One who voluntarily goes into the juris diction on business with the third parties takes the risk of being served there with pro cess ; Case v. Smith, Lineaweaver & Co., 152 Fed. 730.
Service obtained by inviting an officer of a New York corporation to come into New Jer sey for an interview was considered as ob tained by fraud ; Cavanagh v. Transit Co., 133 Fed. 818.
Service of a subpoena in New York on a foreign steamship company may be made on its financial agent who is the head of a firm which is the general agent of the company ; In re Hohorst, 150 U. S. 653, 14 Sup. Ct. 221, 37 L. Ed. 1211.
The residence of a corporate officer in a state does not necessarily give a corporation a domicile in the state. He must be there officially representing the corporation in its business ; Conley v. Alkali Works, 190 U. S. 406, 23 Sup. Ct. 728, 47 L. Ed. 1113; Goldey v. Morning News, 156 U. S. 518, 15 Sup. Ct. 559, 39 L. Ed. 517 ; a mere travelling, agent of a foreign corporation cannot receive serv ice for it ; Saxony Mills v. Wagner, 94 Miss. 233; 47 South. 899, 23 L, R. A. (N. S.) 834, 136 Am. St. Rep. 575, 19 Ann. Cas. 199.
A salaried agent, empowered to solicit ad vertisements for a non-resident newspaper corporation, and to make contracts therefor, and receive payment, and who carries on business at an office having the name of the newspaper on its windows, is a "managing agent," on whom valid service of process against the corporation may be made under the New York Code ; Brewer v. George Knapp & Co.; 82 Fed. 694.
In an action against a foreign corporation, service on an officer who is also the attorney in fact of the plaintiff to institute and prose cute the action is invalid and confers no ju risdiction; George v. Ginning Co., 46 S. C. 1, 24 S. E. 41, 32 L. R. A. 764, 57 Am. St. Rep. 671. Service cannot be made upon the deputy of a public officer, who has been designated as the proper agent of a foreign corporation to receive service; Bennett v. Supreme Tent of K. of M. of W., 40 Wash. 431, 82 Pac. 744, 2 L. R. A. (N. S.) 389. The statutory agent of a foreign corporation cannot admit or waive service where it has not been properly made ; Bennett v. Supreme Tent of K. of M.
of W., 40 Wash. 431, 82 Pac. 744, 2 L. R. A. (N. S.) 389.
Service by publication is in general held valid only in proceedings in rem, where the subject-matter is within the jurisdiction of the court, as in suits in partition, attach ment, for the foreclosure of mortgages, and the enforcement of mechanics' liens.
Where non-residents hold real property within a state, jurisdiction over them may be obtained, under a statute, by publication of notice ; Connor v. R. Co., 109 Fed. 931, 48 C. C. A. 730) 54 L. R. A. 687. The appointment of a trustee to convey land in an action for a specific performance is a proceeding in rem, and notice by publication may be given to non-resident defendants ; Hollander v. Sup ply Co., 109 Md. 131, 71 Atl. 442, 23 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1135.
A state may make reasonable discrimina tions in regard to service of process for en-, forcement of liens for taxes and assessments on real estate between resident and non-resi dent owners, providing for personal service on the former and service by publication on the latter; Ballard v. Hunter, 204 U. S. 241, 27 Sup. Ct. 261, 51 L. Ed. 461. But in the absence of statutory authority, there is no power to order personal service of process upon the defendant outside the jurisdiction. Jennings v. Johnson, 148 Fed. 337, 78 C. C. A. 329 ; and statutes authorizing substituted services are to be strictly construed ; Gage v. Trust Co., 156 Fed. 1002.
Service out of the jurisdiction is "all but annulled In England" ; 19 L. Q. Rev. 123.
An act providing for service on a domestic corporation by advertising, in cases where no service can be had in the county, does violate the federal Constitution ; Ward Lum ber Co. v. Mfg. Co., 107 Va. 626, 59 S. E. 476, 17 L. R. A. (N. S.) 324.
A judgment against a domestic based upon service by publication is good; Clearwater Mercantile Co. v. Shoe Co., 51 Fla. 176, 40 South. 436, 4 L. R. A. (N. S.) 117, 120 Am. St. Rep. 153. Service by publication is valid in an action for tort, where the de fendant is a resident of the state, but cannot be personally served in the county ; v. R. Co., 225 III. 197, 80 N. E. 109, 8 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1186, 116 Am. St. Rep. 133 ; legis lature may provide for the re-establishment of lost records of title to real estate upon process served by publication against un known claimants ; Title & Document Resto ration Co. v. Kerrigan, 150 Cal. 289, 88 Pac. 356, 8 L. R. A. (N. S.) 682, 119 Am. St. Rep. 99, 11 Ann. Cas. 465.