Legal Opinion
Mergenthaler Linotype Co. v. Spokesman Publishing Co.
Oregon Supreme Court
Decided November 13, 1928PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCoshow, J.
The law is well settled that a foreign corporation must comply with the regulatory laws of a state in order to do intrastate business in that state: Rashford Lumber Co. v. Dolan, 122 Or. 572, and cases cited in 579 (260 Pac. 224); Browning v. Waycross, 233 U. S. 16 (58 L. Ed. 828, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 578); General Railway Signal Co. v. Virginia, 246 U. S. 500 (62 L. Ed. 854, 38 Sup. Ct. Rep. 360); International Textbook Co. v. Pigg, 217 U. S. 91, 105, 106 (54 L. Ed. 678, 30 Sup. Ct. Rep. 481, 18 Ann. Cas. 1103, 27 L. R. A. (N. S.) 493); International Trust Co. v. A. Leschen & Sons Rope Co., 41…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- International Harvester Co. of America v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Dahnke-Walker Milling Co. v. BondurantSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
- International Textbook Co. v. PiggSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
- Crutcher v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Chambers v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Enco, Inc. v. F. C. Russell Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1957
- Egli v. HuttonOregon Supreme Court · 1931
- Advance-Rumely Thresher Co., Inc. v. StohlUtah Supreme Court · 1929
- Eastern Iron & Metal Co. v. PattersonHawaii Supreme Court · 1952
- Brandtjen & Kluge, Inc. v. NansonWashington Supreme Court · 1941
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.