
    PEARCE v. SUTHERLAND et al.
    (First Division. Juneau.
    May 7, 1907.)
    No. 615A.
    1. Process (§ 118*) — -Parties—Witnesses.
    A party to a suit and a witness, who voluntarily and in good! faith comes into Alaska from New York to attend trial in the district court, cannot, while in attendance, be served with summons in new civil litigation in the same court. Such service will be quashed on motion.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Process, Cent. Dig. §§ 146— 150; Dec. Dig. § 118.]
    Motion to quash service of summons made on defendant Sutherland in this case. The motion is based upofi the fact that he is a nonresident; that his place of residence is in New York; that he voluntarily came into Alaska as a witness in the-trial of a case entitled “McFarland v. Alaska-Perseverance-Company,” of which defendant corporation he was ¡president, and in the trial of which he was a necessary witness. He was also subpoenaed at Ketchikan and again at Douglas as a witness in that case.
    George C. Isreal and J. A. Hellenthal, for plaintiff.
    F. M. Stone, Winn & Burton, Maloney & Cobb, and R. F. Eafoon, for defendants.
    
      
      See same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. Key No. Series & ítép’r Indexes
    
   WICKERSHAM, District Judge.

A party to a suit and a witness, who voluntarily and in good faith comes into Alaska from New York to attend trial in the district court, cannot, while in attendance, be served with summons in new civil litigation in this court. Such service will be quashed on motion. Parker v. Hotchkiss, 1 Wall. Jr. 269, Fed. Cas. No. 10,739; Brooks v. Farwell (C. C.) 4 Fed. 166; Larned v. Griffin (C. C.) 12 Fed. 590; Wilson-Sewing-Machine Co. v. Wilson (C. C.) 22 Fed. 803; Small v. Montgomery (C. C.) 23 Fed. 707; Kauffman v. Kennedy (C. C.) 25 Fed. 785; Kinne v. Lant (C. C.) 68 Fed. 436; Hale v. Wharton (C. C.) 73 Fed. 739; Morrow v. Dudley (D. C.) 144 Fed. 441; Skinner v. Waite (C. C.) 155 Fed. 828.  