Legal Opinion

Wade v. Romano

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided December 7, 1959No. Civ. A. 25753PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

EGAN, District Judge.

The defendant has moved to set aside service of the summons and complaint and to dismiss the action on the ground that neither service of the summons and complaint on Charles Kurz Company nor service of an alias summons and complaint on the Secretary of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania was a valid service on the defendant, a non-resident of Pennsylvania.

The plaintiff originally made service on Charles Kurz Company, a corporation engaged in the business of acting as agent for owners, charterers, and operators of steamships, with its offices and principal place of business…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Williams Et Ux. v. MeredithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
  2. McCall v. GatesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1946
  3. Holland v. Parry Nav. Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1947
  4. Novitski v. Lykes Steamship Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1950
  5. Higgins v. California Tanker Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1957

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Gkiafis v. Steamship YiosonasCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1965
  2. Gkiafis v. Steamship YiosonasCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1965
  3. Rutter v. Louis Dreyfus CorporationDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1960
  4. Phillips v. FlynnDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1974
  5. Gkiafis v. Steamship YiosonasDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1963

1 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