Deardorf v. Idaho Nat. Harvester Co.
Oregon Supreme Court
From Umatilla: Gilbert W. Phelps, Judge. In Banc. The plaintiffs allege the breach of a warranty of a National Combine Harvester which they aver the defendant, an Idaho corporation, sold to them with the guaranty mentioned. The sheriff’s return of service of summons is as follows: “State of Oregon, County of Umatilla, — ss.
Read the full summary
From Umatilla: Gilbert W. Phelps, Judge. In Banc. The plaintiffs allege the breach of a warranty of a National Combine Harvester which they aver the defendant, an Idaho corporation, sold to them with the guaranty mentioned. The sheriff’s return of service of summons is as follows: “State of Oregon, County of Umatilla, — ss. “I hereby certify that I served the within Summons on the within-named defendant, Idaho National Harvester Company, by delivering to Jesse A. Mathes, on October 23, 1917, a copy of said summons certified to by me as Sheriff, together with a copy of the complaint in this…
1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.
As early as Hacheny v. Leary, 12 Or. 40 (7 Pac. 329), this court held that soliciting business in a state for a nonresident corporation was not doing business within that state. That was a case where the plaintiffs claimed as indorsees of a note said to have been given in payment of an overdue premium on a previously issued policy of life insurance held by one of the defendants in a Kansas life insurance company. The company had an agent in Seattle, Washington, who solicited one Yesler to take out a policy on his own life. He received Yesler’s application with the amount of the first premium…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Green v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1907
- People's Tobacco Co. v. American Tobacco Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1918
- Philadelphia & Reading Railway Co. v. McKibbinSupreme Court of the United States · 1917
- General Inv. Co. v. Lake Shore & M. S. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1918
- Hyde v. . GoodnowNew York Court of Appeals · 1850
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Camas Stage Co. v. KozerOregon Supreme Court · 1922
- State Ex Rel. Hupp Motor Car Corp. v. KanzlerOregon Supreme Court · 1929
- Loveland v. WarnerOregon Supreme Court · 1922
- Endicott, Johnson & Co. v. Multnomah CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1920
- State v. MeyerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.