Fee v. Big Sand Iron Co.
Ohio Supreme Court
• Error to the district court of Vinton county. In September, 1857, the plaintiff, Eee, filed his petition against the Big Sand Iron Company, a corporation, in the court of common pleas of Vinton county. Summons was duly issued, and return of service made as follows: “Received this writ September 17, 1856; served the same by leaving a certified copy of this writ with the clerk of the Big Sand Iron Company at their office. Wm.
Read the full summary
• Error to the district court of Vinton county. In September, 1857, the plaintiff, Eee, filed his petition against the Big Sand Iron Company, a corporation, in the court of common pleas of Vinton county. Summons was duly issued, and return of service made as follows: “Received this writ September 17, 1856; served the same by leaving a certified copy of this writ with the clerk of the Big Sand Iron Company at their office. Wm. Gold, sheriff of Vinton county, by H. Reynolds, deputy sheriff of Vinton county.” At the October term, 1857, the common pleas rendered judgment by default against the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Oouet.
Section (97) of the act of May 1, 1852, to provide for the regulation of incorporated companies in the State of Ohio (S. & C. St. 310), provides that,“ suits may be brought against corporations, other than railroad companies, in the same manner as against individuals, and service shall be made on the president, directors, secretary or agent in person, or by leaving a copy at the principal office of such company,” etc.
The 66th section of the • code of civil procedure, which took effect June 1, 1853 (S. & C. St. 963), provides that, “ A summons against a corporation may be served…
2Cited by30 opinions
- Yorke v. YorkeNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1893
- Burdette v. CorganSupreme Court of Kansas · 1881
- Childs v. LantermanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Sugg v. ThorntonSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Haas v. LeesSupreme Court of Kansas · 1877
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.