Legal Opinion
Oyler v. J. P. Seeburg Corp.
District Court, N.D. Texas
Decided October 30, 1939No. 169PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ATWELL, District Judge.
Oyler claims that the Seeburg Corporation has appropriated a certain patent that was granted on his invention. He sues for damages. He is a resident of Texas.
The defendant is an Illinois corporation, with its office and place of business at Chicago. In order to get that corporation into court here, the plaintiff caused service to be made upon the Electro Ball Company, a Texas corporation, with its principal office and place of business in Dallas, Texas, and also upon a Mr. Sterns.
The defendant moves to quash service and dismiss the suit, on the ground that those served…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Cannon Manufacturing Co. v. Cudahy Packing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1925
- International Harvester Co. of America v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Philadelphia & Reading Railway Co. v. McKibbinSupreme Court of the United States · 1917
- Bank of America v. Whitney Central National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- James-Dickinson Farm Mortgage Co. v. HarrySupreme Court of the United States · 1927
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Radio Station WMFR, Inc. v. Eitel-McCullough, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
- Favell-Utley Realty Co. v. Harbor Plywood Corp.District Court, N.D. California · 1950
- Rosenthal v. Distillers Distributing Corp.District Court, N.D. Texas · 1950