Legal Opinion

Halliday v. Burlington Transp. Co.

District Court, W.D. Missouri

Decided December 4, 1940No. 535PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

COLLET, District Judge.

By its motion to quash the service upon it, defendant challenges the constitutionality of Section 5279, Laws Mo.1931, p. 316, Mo.St.Ann. § 5279, p. 6694.1 It is *109asserted that the statute is deficient under the due process clause of the Federal Constitution (Amendment 14, Section 1) and the corresponding provision of the Missouri Constitution (Article 2; Section 30, Mo.St.Ann.), in that it provides for service on motor carriers (whether an individual or a corporation) by service upon the Secretary of the Public Service Commission without any requirement that the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Wuchter v. PizzuttiSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
  2. Washington Ex Rel. Bond & Goodwin & Tucker, Inc. v. Superior Court of Wash. for Spokane Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1933
  3. Badger Dome Oil Co. v. HallamCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1938

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Harris v. Bates Ex Rel. CurrySupreme Court of Missouri · 1954
  2. Crump v. TreadwaySupreme Court of Missouri · 1955

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API