Legal Opinion

Jones v. Stefco Steel Co.

New York Supreme Court

Decided April 24, 1925Published

1Opinion of the Court

Carswell, J.:

Motion by defendant to vacate service of a summons. The defendant is a foreign corporation.

The only question that need be considered is whether it is doing business in this State to a degree that will sustain service of process upon it through one Krumholz. The case most nearly parallel to the facts in this case is Cochran B. & M. Co. v. Monroe B. B. Co. (197 App. Div. 221; affd., 232 N. Y. 503). The test is that contained in Tauza v. Susquehanna Coal Co. (220 N. Y. 259). It is whether the corporation is doing enough business in the State to enable the court to say that the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Tauza v. . Susquehanna Coal Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1917
  2. Holzer v. . Dodge BrothersNew York Court of Appeals · 1922
  3. Beck v. North Packing & Provision Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1913
  4. Cochran Box & Manufacturing Co. v. Monroe Binder Board Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1921
  5. Cochran Box & Manufacturing Co. v. Monroe Binder Board Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1921

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API