Johnson v. Hanover Fire Ins.
District Court, N.D. Illinois
1Opinion of the CourtBlodgett, J.
This is a suit on a policy of insurance alleged to have been issued by defendant to plaintiffs. The defendant is a cor*98poration created and existing under the laws of the state of New York. The return of the marshal shows service of the summons “by delivering a copy thereof, and also by reading the same, to Carl A. F. Henicke and Joseph Schoeniger, agents of said defendant.” The defendant has entered a special appearance, and moved to quash and set aside service of summons, because Henicke and Sheoeniger, on whom process was served, were not the agents of the defendant for that purpose;' but…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Mineral Point Railroad v. KeepIllinois Supreme Court · 1859
- Hannibal & St. Joseph Railroad v. CraneIllinois Supreme Court · 1882
- Sibert v. ThorpIllinois Supreme Court · 1875
- Peoria Insurance v. WarnerIllinois Supreme Court · 1862
3Cited by3 opinions
- Magnaflux Corporation v. FoersterDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1963
- Curtis v. JordanSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1905
- Venner v. Denver Union Water Co.Arapahoe County District Court · 1902