Legal Opinion
Peebles v. Chrysler Corp.
District Court, W.D. Missouri
Decided February 23, 1932No. 8191PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
REEVE£), District Judge.
On motion to quash. Chrysler Sales Corporation alone, of the above defendants, has been served with process. It was served both by writ of attachment and a summons on garnishment. It has moved to quash the service in both instances for the reason, as alleged,,it is not doing business within the state of Missouri so as to subject it to the service of process. Service was attempted in both eases by delivering writ and summons to N. W. Seidell and J. T. Condon, salesman for and sales representative of said corporation. Both of these parties were called as witnesses, and…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- International Harvester Co. of America v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Green v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1907
- People's Tobacco Co. v. American Tobacco Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1918
- Philadelphia & Reading Railway Co. v. McKibbinSupreme Court of the United States · 1917
- Stephan v. Union Pac. Ry. Co.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1921
3Cited by13 opinions
- Frene v. Louisville Cement Co.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1943
- Toedman v. Nooter CorporationSupreme Court of Kansas · 1957
- Clements v. MacFadden Publications, Inc.District Court, E.D. Texas · 1989
- Kaffenberger v. KremerDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1945
- Klein v. Sunbeam Corp.Superior Court of Delaware · 1951
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.