Legal Opinion

George A. Hormel & Co. v. Ackman

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided September 17, 1934PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.

The controlling question here relates to the legality vel non of the service of summons ad respondendum upon the defendant in the court below, a nonresident corporation, upon which service judgment by default and final judgment were rendered against the defendant, plaintiff in error here, in an action in tort for damages. The sheriff’s return showed service upon one James C. Waseman, “being then and there a business agent of the defendant * * * resident in the State of Florida; and there being then and there no President, Vice-President, or other head of such corporation, nor Cashier, nor…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. International Harvester Co. of America v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1914
  2. McGee v. AncrumSupreme Court of Florida · 1894
  3. Cone v. Tuscaloosa Manuf'g Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1896
  4. Bartlett v. CohnSupreme Court of Florida · 1929
  5. Atlantic & Gulf Grocery Co. v. Aetna Mills Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1919

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. International Shoe Co. v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Mason v. Mason Products Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1953
  3. Polizzi v. Cowles Magazines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1952
  4. Crown Colony Club, Limited v. HoneckerDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1974
  5. State Ex Rel. Schmidt v. District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 1940

3 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