Legal Opinion

United States v. Mine Hill & Schuylkill Haven R.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided August 5, 1949No. Civ. A. No. 7964Published

1Opinion of the Court

KIRKPATRICK, Chief Judge.

The defendant was organized to operate a railroad. Whatever it has done since 1894, when it leased all its property to the Reading, it has not operated the road, nor do I understand the plaintiff to argue that it has. The plaintiff’s position is based on the proposition that a corporation may be “doing business” within the meaning of the Statute even though not engaged in the particular business contemplated by its charter, Phillips v. International Salt Co., D. C., 3 F.2d 678, 681, affirmed 274 U.S. 718, 47 S.Ct. 589, 71 L.Ed. 1323, or fulfilling the purpose of its…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. McCoach v. Minehill & Schuylkill Haven RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
  2. Magruder v. Washington, Baltimore & Annapolis Realty Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1942
  3. Fort Worth & Denver City Railway v. StateSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
  4. International Salt Co. v. PhillipsDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1925
  5. North Pennsylvania R. v. RothensiesDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1942

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

Powered by the Exa API