Legal Opinion

Sleicher. v. Pullman Co.

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

Decided May 4, 1909PublishedCited by 5 opinions

On Motion of Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Company to Set Aside Service of Summons.

1Opinion of the Court

NOYES, Circuit Judge.

‘The following facts upon the question whether the defendant railroad company, a foreign corporation, is-doing business in the state of New York, may be regarded as established by the affidavits: (1) Said defendant leases and maintains offices in the state of New York, and employs freight and passenger agents who solicit business therein and negotiate with intending shippers and passengers. In some instances the passenger agent sends out and procures tickets for a prospective passenger from the initial carrier. (2) Said defendant has an assistant secretary in said state,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Green v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1907
  2. Goldey v. Morning NewsSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
  3. Denver & R. G. R. v. RodderCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1900

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Chesapeake & O. Ry. Co. v. StojanowskiCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1911
  2. Goade v. VollrathDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 1948
  3. Bullfrog Goldfield R. R. Co. v. JordanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
  4. Cody Motors Co. v. Warren Motor Car Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1912
  5. Klabzuba v. Southern Pac. Co.District Court, W.D. Washington · 1929

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

Powered by the Exa API