Legal Opinion

Dobson v. Maytag Sales Corp.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided February 14, 1940No. Calendar 40,390PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMcAllister, J.

Plaintiff sued defendant, a foreign corporation, not authorized to do business in the State of Michigan, and caused service of summons to be made upon Harry Bush,, as an agent of defendant in the county of Washtenaw. Defendant entered a special appearance and moved to dismiss and quash service, on the ground that the court had no jurisdiction for the reason that defendant at no time conducted any business in the State and that it was dissolved prior to the commencement of the suit. On hearing, the trial court denied the motion to dismiss, and defendant appeals.

“No all embracing rule as to…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Malooly v. York Heating & Ventilating Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1935
  2. Wills v. National Mineral Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1936
  3. Hammond v. National Life Ass'nAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1901
  4. A. Harvey's Sons Manf'g Co. v. Sterling Materials Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1929
  5. Watson-Higgins Milling Co. v. St. Paul Milling Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1931

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. International Shoe Co. v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Long Manufacturing Co. v. Wright-Way Farm Service, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1974
  3. Marlow v. Hinman Milking Mach. Co.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1947
  4. Parris v. . Fischer Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
  5. Long Manufacturing Co. v. Wright-Way Farm Service, Inc.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1972

7 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