Bagdon v. Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Co.
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered December 30, 1915, which affirmed an order of Special Term setting aside the service of the summons in this action. The following question was certified: “ Should service of the summons in this action upon the defendant be set aside ? ” The nature of the action and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion.
Read the full summary
Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered December 30, 1915, which affirmed an order of Special Term setting aside the service of the summons in this action. The following question was certified: “ Should service of the summons in this action upon the defendant be set aside ? ” The nature of the action and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. By the service of the process upon the designated agent of the defendant, this court acquired jurisdiction of the defendant, and the defendant has…
1Opinion of the CourtCardozo, J.
The plaintiff is a resident of this state; the defendant, a Pennsylvania corporation; and the cause of action, a breach of contract. The plaintiff, while working for the defendant in Pennsylvania, was injured through the defendant’s negligence. A contract was then made to compensate him for his injuries. The plaintiff complains that this contract has been broken. He has served the summons on an agent designated by the defendant as “ a person upon whom process against the corporation may be served within the state ” (Gen. Corp. L. § 16; Consol. Laws, ch. 23). The defendant concedes that it is…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Goldey v. Morning NewsSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Simon v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Old Wayne Mut. Life Assn. of Indianapolis v. McDonoughSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Barrow Steamship Co. v. KaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Conley v. Mathieson Alkali WorksSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by118 opinions
- Neirbo Co. v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Tauza v. . Susquehanna Coal Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1917
- Gucci America, Inc. v. Bank of ChinaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2014
- Pennsylvania Fire Insurance v. Gold Issue Mining & Milling Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1917
- Bomze v. Nardis Sportswear, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1948
113 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.