Legal Opinion

Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co. v. Coast Fir & Cedar Products Co.

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided June 23, 1926No. Gen. No. 30,696Published

1Opinion of the CourtJustice O’Connor

Plaintiff brought an action of assumpsit against the defendant to recover $7,500 damages claimed to have been sustained by plaintiff on account of the defendant’s breach of a contract. Thereafter defendant entered its special appearance and moved to dismiss the suit on the ground that it had not been served with summons. There was a hearing of the motion before the court, the motion was sustained, the service quashed and the suit dismissed. The summons was served on the defendant by leaving a copy thereof With “Fred J. Schnell, Agent” of the defendant. The defendant stated that its motion was…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Booz v. Texas & Pacific Railway Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Chicago City Railway Co. v. UhterIllinois Supreme Court · 1904
  3. Charles Friend & Co. v. Goldsmith & Seidel Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1923
  4. Clark v. Daniel Hayes Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1919
  5. O'Donoghue v. St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1913

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API