Legal Opinion
Mauney v. . Luzier's, Inc.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Decided December 15, 1937PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDeviN, J.
The question presented by this appeal is whether the facts found by the court below are sufficient to sustain the judgment that the service of process on the defendant was in all respects legal and valid.
The pertinent provisions of the statute, 0. S., 483 (1), prescribing the method of service of process on corporations, resident and nonresident, require that the summons be served upon an officer of the corporation or “managing or local agent thereof. Any person receiving or collecting money in this State for a corporation of this or any other state or government is a local agent for the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- International Harvester Co. of America v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- People's Tobacco Co. v. American Tobacco Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1918
- Riverside & Dan River Cotton Mills v. MenefeeSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Whitehurst v. . KerrSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
- Lunceford v. Commercial Travelers Mutual Accident Ass'n of AmericaSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- McDonald Service Co. v. People's National Bank of Rock HillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
- Plott v. . MichaelSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
- CAROLINA PAPER COMPANY, INC. v. BouchelleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
- Higgins v. SimmonsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1988