Bond v. Harrel
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtHallows, J.
The appellant contends: (1) That the court did not acquire jurisdiction by service on it in Missouri, and (2) that Jesse J. Harrel as a matter of law was an independent contractor and consequently any negligence of Harrel or his wife could not be imputed to the appellant.
A court may acquire jurisdiction over a foreign corporation under sec. 262.09 (4), Stats. 1957, if the foreign corporation is “doing business in Wisconsin” at the time of service or the cause of action against it arose out of “the doing of business in Wisconsin” and the summons is served on an officer of the corporation…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Voysey v. LabiskyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1960
- James v. Tobin-Sutton Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1923
- Huck v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1958
- Badger Furniture Co. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1929
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by44 opinions
- Pamperin v. Trinity Memorial HospitalWisconsin Supreme Court · 1988
- Drexel v. Union Prescription Centers, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1978
- Wisconsin's Environmental Decade, Inc. v. Public Service CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
- Blue Bell, Inc. v. Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co., Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1986
- Arsand v. City of FranklinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1978
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.