Hawn v. Pennsylvania Canal Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 414, Jan. T., 1893, by plaintiff, Mary J. Hawn, from order of C. P. Huntingdon Co., Sep. T., 1892, No. 19, making absolute rule to set aside service of process. Before Sterrett, C. J., Green, Mitchell, Dean and Thompson, JJ. Rule to set aside service of process in action of trespass. The facts appear by the opinion of the Supreme Court. Error assigned was making rule absolute.
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
The only assignment of error is the order of court setting aside service of the summons in this case.
The act of March 17, 1856, P. L. 388, section 1, provides: “ When any action is commenced by any person against any corporation in any county in which the property of said corporation was wholly or in part situated, it shall be lawful, if the president, treasurer, secretary or chief clerk do not reside or cannot be found in such county, for the sheriff or other officer to whom anj’- process may be directed, to serve the same on anj'- manager or director in such county, and the…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Park Brothers & Co. v. Oil City Boiler WorksSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
- DeHaas v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918
- Bailey v. Williamsport & North Branch RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
- Gengenbach v. Willow Grove Park Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Nelson v. Deming Inv. Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.