Legal Opinion
Mid-Continent Petroleum Corp. v. Universal Oil Products Co.
New York Supreme Court
Decided October 4, 1950PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Pécora, J.
Defendant moves to vacate service of summons and complaint on the ground that it is not doing business in this State and hence is not subject to the jurisdiction of its courts. Service of the summons and complaint herein was made in two ways: (1) by delivery of a copy to the Secretary of State; and (2) by serving a copy on a director of the defendant corporation *1074in New York City. There is no adequate showing in the papers that defendant was doing business in this State, at the time service was made. However, defendant was doing business here at the time the agreement, forming the…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Knott Corporation v. FurmanCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1947
- Gaboury v. Central Vermont Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1929
- Compania Mexicana Refinadora Island v. Compania Metropolitana De OleoductosNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Darling Stores Corporation v. Young Realty Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1941
- Ehrman v. Teutonia Ins.District Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1880
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- French v. Gibbs Corporation. Henry v. Gibbs CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1951
- Green v. ClarkDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1959
- Geiss-America v. FraserDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1958
- Mid-Continent Petroleum Corp. v. Universal Oil Products Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1951