
    MINERVA VIOLA THOMAS v. WILLIAM THOMAS.
    
    December 12, 1924.
    No. 24,311.
    Interlocutory order not appealable.
    Appeal from order opening divorce judgment for purpose of taking testimony to ascertain whether defendant concealed himself from service of process at time of bringing action, was dismissed, because order is interlocutory and not appealable. [Reporter.]
    Action in the district court for Hennepin county for absolute divorce. The case was tried before Buffington, J., who made findings and granted plaintiff an absolute divorce and alimony. From an order, Dickinson, J., opening the case to take testimony upon the question of defendant’s residence and concealment, if any, from service of process at the time, plaintiff appealed.
    Appeal dismissed.
    
      F. M. Ridgeway, for appellant.
    
      Bessesen & Bessesen, for respondent.
    
      
       Reported in 201 N. W. 304.
    
   PEE CUEIAM.

This is an action for divorce in which the summons was served by publication and judgment was entered dissolving the bonds of matrimony between the parties, and also decreeing that the defendant pay the plaintiff the sum of $5 per week as permanent alimony so long as she remained unmarried and the sum of $50 as attorneys’ fees. Thereafter defendant made an application to have so much of the judgment as decreed the payment of alimony and attorneys’ fees set aside and annulled on the ground that the court had no jurisdiction to enter a judgment in personam where the only service upon him was made by publication. Plaintiff opposed the application on the ground that defendant had kept himself concealed for the purpose of avoiding service of process, which charge defendant denied. The court made an order opening the case for the purpose of taking evidence to determine where defendant had resided and whether he had kept himself concealed, and vacated the personal judgment for alimony and attorney’s fees until the hearing on the order. Plaintiff appealed from this order. The order is only an interlocutory order and is not appealable. It does not determine the merits and is not final.

Appeal dismissed.  