Taylor v. St. Louis Merchants' Bridge Terminal Railway Co.
Supreme Court of Missouri
Transferred from St. Louis Court of Appeals. (1) Service on the party himself must he had unless the attorney is mentioned in the statute. The fact that defendant was a corporation is no excuse for serving defendant’s attorneys rather than defendant. By a perusal of the statutes and the decisions of our courts construing them, it will be seen that wherever service on defendant is required the service must be the same as would be had in case of a summons instead of a notice.
Read the full summary
Transferred from St. Louis Court of Appeals. (1) Service on the party himself must he had unless the attorney is mentioned in the statute. The fact that defendant was a corporation is no excuse for serving defendant’s attorneys rather than defendant. By a perusal of the statutes and the decisions of our courts construing them, it will be seen that wherever service on defendant is required the service must be the same as would be had in case of a summons instead of a notice. The same is true of corporations. There is no statute in this State authorizing service of a summons upon a…
1Opinion of the CourtGraves, J.
— Plaintiff, A. R. Taylor, is and for many years has been an attorney at law in the State of Missouri, residing in the city of St. Louis. Defendant is a Missouri railway corporation. One Oscar F. Randolph had a cause of action against the defendant in this case for personal injuries. Randolph employed Taylor as his attorney, by a written contract in these words:
‘ ‘ This article of agreement made and entered into this May 31st, 1901, between Oscar F. Randolph, party of the first part, and A. R. Taylor, party of the second part, witnesseth that the said party of the first part has this day and…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Wait v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1907
- O'Connor v. St. Louis Transit Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1906
- Taylor v. St. Louis Transit Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1906
- Morrow v. SurberSupreme Court of Missouri · 1888
3Cited by9 opinions
- Denson v. Alabama Fuel & Iron Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1916
- Whitecotton v. St. Louis & Hannibal Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1913
- George W. Ultch Lumber Co. v. Hall Plastering, Inc.District Court, W.D. Missouri · 1979
- Abbott v. Marion Mining Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1914
- Elliott v. Wabash Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1921
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.