Murphy v. Herring-Hall-Marvin Safe Co.
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Nevada
■Action by J. B. Murphy and another, doing business under the name of Murphy-Balliet Company, against the Herring-Hall-Marvin Safe Company. On motion to quash service of summons.
1Opinion of the Court
VAN FLEET, District Judge.
This is a motion to quash the service of summons on the ground that it was not made in a manner to give the court jurisdiction of the defendant. The .action is one at law, commenced in the state court by plaintiffs, residents of the state, to recover damages for alleged deceit against the defendant, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the state of New Fork. Defendant maintained no. office dr place of business in the state, nor had any resident agent therein, but had a general agent for the Pacific Coast who was a resident of the state of California…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Goldey v. Morning NewsSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Wabash Western Railway v. BrowSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- State ex rel. Curtis v. McCulloughNevada Supreme Court · 1867
- National Accident Society v. SpiroSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. McCartyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1902
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Leonardi v. Chase Nat. Bank of City of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1936
- Feldman Inv. Co. v. Connecticut General Life Ins.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1935
- Brookings State Bank v. Federal Reserve BankDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1923
- Glasmann v. Second District Court in & for Weber CountyUtah Supreme Court · 1932
- Everett Ry., Light & Power Co. v. United StatesDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 1916
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.