Walde v. Bowers Bat. Mfg. Co., Inc.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Stern,
This appeal is from an order of the court below discharging a rule to show cause why the service on defendant of a writ of summons in assumpsit should not be set aside. Defendant is a domestic corporation with its principal place of business in Berks County, but the present suit was commenced in Philadelphia and service was effected there at a place alleged by plaintiff to be a branch office of defendant.
Defendant is engaged in the manufacture and sale of storage batteries, its plant being in Reading. It maintains at 1724-26 Fairmount Avenue, Philadelphia, a…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Park Brothers & Co. v. Oil City Boiler WorksSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
- DeHaas v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918
- Gengenbach v. Willow Grove Park Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Gilbert v. Lebanon Valley Street RailwaySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
- Lobb v. Pennsylvania Cement Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Philadelphia Gear Wks. v. Read mach.co., Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- Lallone v. Philadelphia Suburban Transportation Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1948
- Shoffner v. Glenshaw Glass Co.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1959
- Everett v. Robbins, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lehigh County1951
- Kaschak v. Greek Catholic Union of U. S. A.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1942