Legal Opinion

Receivers Middlesex Banking Co. v. Realty Investment Co.

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided February 5, 1926PublishedCited by 31 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMaltbie, J.

The service made upon the three nonresident respondents by sending to them by registered mail copies of the petition and other documents would not in itself subject them to the jurisdiction of the court in personam. Harris v. Weed, 89 Conn. 214, 221, 93 Atl. 232. The matter does not, however, stop there. Under the allegation of the petition, the primary issue was as to the correctness of the account rendered to the respondents and the finality of the settlement claimed to have been made by the receivers with them, and the trial court, issue being made only upon its allegations, could not have…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Cole v. CunninghamSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
  2. Reynolds v. StocktonSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
  3. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. v. Lake Street Elevated RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
  4. Merchants Heat & Light Co. v. J. B. Clow & SonsSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
  5. Merritt v. American Steel-Barge Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1897

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

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. Clark v. WilliardSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
  2. In re Baby Girl B.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
  3. Ferguson v. SaboSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1932
  4. Advest, Inc. v. WachtelSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
  5. Doerr v. WarnerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1956

26 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