Hewitt v. Canadian Pacific Railway Co.
New York Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Proskauer, J.:
This court has jurisdiction, under section 46 of the General Corporation Law, as added by chapter 916 of the Laws of 1920, of this cause of action against a foreign corporation, because plaintiff is a resident of this State and there is no proof in the moving papers that the assignment to him was merely colorable.
The court has jurisdiction over the person of defendant, because defendant’s managing agent was served under subdivision 3 of section 229 of the Civil Practice Act, and defendant was doing business in this State within the principles laid down in Tauza v. Susquehanna…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Tauza v. . Susquehanna Coal Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1917
- St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. of Texas v. AlexanderSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Davis v. Farmers Co-Operative Equity Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1923
- State Ex Rel. St. Louis, Brownsville & Mexico Railway Co. v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Cochran Box & Manufacturing Co. v. Monroe Binder Board Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1921
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- United States Merchants' & Shippers' Ins. v. Elder Dempster & Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1932
- Brown v. Canadian Pac. Ry. Co.District Court, W.D. New York · 1938
- Fisher v. Canadian Pac. Ry. Co.District Court, W.D. New York · 1932