Legal Opinion
Johnson & Gould v. Joseph Schlitz Brewing Co.
District Court, E.D. Tennessee
Decided September 1, 1939No. 25PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DARR, District Judge.
Plaintiff brought action in this court against Joseph Schlitz Brewing Company, a Wisconsin corporation. The motion sets out that the defendant is not in court as to the second and third counts of the complaint because of want of proper service of process.
The original complaint was filed January 31, 1939. On February 20, 1939, the defendant filed a motion to dismiss for want of proper service or for want of jurisdiction of person. Thereafter certain amendments were made, and on March 22, 1939, the defendant again filed a motion to'dismiss for want of service and also…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Thames & Mersey Marine Insurance v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Jones v. AndrewsSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
- Wetmore State Bank v. CourterSupreme Court of Kansas · 1916
- Burke v. Monumental Division, No. 52, Brotherhood of Locomotive EngineersDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1919
- Davis v. Standard Oil Co. of IndianaCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1931
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Johnson v. Joseph Schlitz Brewing Co.District Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1940
- Louisiana Farmers' Protective Union, Inc. v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. of America, Inc.District Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1940
- Bigelow v. RKO Radio Pictures, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1954
- In re Watauga Steam LaundryDistrict Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1947
- Saunders v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire · 1945
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.