28 U.S.C. § 1655

Lien enforcement; absent defendants

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 28 CasesGoogle Scholar

In an action in a district court to enforce any lien upon or claim to, or to remove any incumbrance or lien or cloud upon the title to, real or personal property within the district, where any defendant cannot be served within the State, or does not voluntarily appear, the court may order the absent defendant to appear or plead by a day certain.

Such order shall be served on the absent defendant personally if practicable, wherever found, and also upon the person or persons in possession or charge of such property, if any. Where personal service is not practicable, the order shall be published as the court may direct, not less than once a week for six consecutive weeks.

If an absent defendant does not appear or plead within the time allowed, the court may proceed as if the absent defendant had been served with process within the State, but any adjudication shall, as regards the absent defendant without appearance, affect only the property which is the subject of the action. When a part of the property is within another district, but within the same state, such action may be brought in either district.

Any defendant not so personally notified may, at any time within one year after final judgment, enter his appearance, and thereupon the court shall set aside the judgment and permit such defendant to plead on payment of such costs as the court deems just.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 220 cases (46 in the last 5 years), 1948–2026 · leading case: Budget Blinds, Inc. v. White

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Budget Blinds, Inc. v. White (2008) ca3 · cites it 4× “The First Circuit explained that the "other procedure" is a reference to language that now appears under Rule 60(d): "This rule does not limit a court's power to: (1) entertain an independent action to relieve a party from a judgment, order, or proceeding; (2) grant relief under…”

Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc. (1995) scotus · cites it 2× “[11] The Government also calls our attention to 28 U. S. C. § 1655 , a statute that requires courts to reopen final in rem judgments upon entries of appearance by defendants who were not personally served.”

Langbord v. United States Department of the Treasury (2016) ca3 · cites it 2× “§ 2410 (a); 28 U.S.C. § 1655 ; cf. Hoelzer v. City of Stamford, 933 F.”

Gerard A. Harrison and Harrison Ranch, Inc. v. Carey Prather and William Prather (1968) ca5 · cites it 5× “They assert that service of process against the nonresident, William Prather, under 28 U.S.C. § 1655 is proper because the complaint as amended seeks to establish claims not only to real property, but also to personal property and to an accounting involving funds or personal…”

Laura Canaday v. The Anthem Companies, Inc. (2021) ca6 “§ 1651 (All Writs Act); 28 U.S.C. § 1655 (actions to assert rights in property when the defendant cannot be served within the State); 28 U.”

British American Insurance v. Fullerton (In re British American Insurance) (2013) flsb · cites it 3× “In arguing that the claim presented in Count I is located in The Bahamas, the Defendants look primarily to case law developed in the context of interstate es-cheatment disputes and case law analyzing the location of intangible assets for purposes of in rem actions under 28 U.”

South Motor Co. v. Carter-Pritchett-Hodges, Inc. (In Re MMH Automotive Group, LLC) (2008) flsb · cites it 3× “This rule does not limit a court’s power to: (1) entertain an independent action to relieve a party from a judgment, order, or proceeding; (2) grant relief under 28 U.S.C. § 1655 to a defendant who was not personally notified of the action; or (3) set aside a judgment for fraud…”

Inland Concrete Enterprises, Inc. v. Kraft (2016) cacd · cites it 2× “RULE 60(d) IS OF NO AVAIL TO KRAFT HERE Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(d), Other Powers to Grant Relief, provides in its entirety as follows: This rule does not limit a court’s power to: (1) entertain an independent action to relieve a party from a judgment, order, or…”

FFOC Co. v. Invent A.G. (1994) mied · cites it 8× “To begin, Defendants argue that the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1655 because the “res,” i.e., the patent owned by Invent, is not within this district.”

Lord Day & Lord v. Socialist Republic of Vietnam (2001) nysd · cites it 3× “§ 1655 , where a defendant does not voluntarily appear, “the court may proceed as if the absent defendant had been served with process within the State, but any adjudication shall, as regards the defendant without appearance, affect only the property which is the subject of the…”

Savage v. First Nat. Bank & Trust Co. of Tulsa (1976) oknd · cites it 5× “§ 1334 and alleges venue is proper as to Chevron by virtue *449 of 28 U.S.C. § 1655 . Title 28 U.S.C. § 1655 provides in pertinent part: “In an action in a district court to enforce any lien upon or claim to, or to remove any incumbrance or lien or cloud upon the title to, real…”

Heathmount A.E. Corp. v. Technodome.com (2000) vaed · cites it 4× “Before the Court are Plaintiffs Motion for an Order Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1655 and Rule 4(n) to Appear or Plead and Plaintiffs Motion to Deposit Domain Names in Registry of the Court.”

Show all 220 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.