State ex rel. Hays v. Robertson
Supreme Court of Missouri
Certiorari. (1) The respondents, in their opinions filed in the case of Mergenthaler Linotype Company v. Hays, held, as a matter of law, that there was no evidence of the transaction of business by the plaintiff, Mergenthaler Linotype Company, in this State; in so holding, the decision was in direct conflict with three controlling decisions of the Supreme Court. Linotype Co. v. Hays, 181 S. W. 1183; Linotype Co. v. Hays, 182 Mo.
Read the full summary
Certiorari. (1) The respondents, in their opinions filed in the case of Mergenthaler Linotype Company v. Hays, held, as a matter of law, that there was no evidence of the transaction of business by the plaintiff, Mergenthaler Linotype Company, in this State; in so holding, the decision was in direct conflict with three controlling decisions of the Supreme Court. Linotype Co. v. Hays, 181 S. W. 1183; Linotype Co. v. Hays, 182 Mo. App. 113; Machinery Co. v. Ramlose, 210 Mo. 631; Machinery Co. v. Ramlose, 231 Mo. 508; Kansas City v. McDonald, 175 S. W. 917. (2) The opinions of the respondents…
1Opinion of the CourtFaris, J.
This is an original proceeding by certiorari to bring up to this court the record of the Springfield Court of Appeals in the case of Mergenthaler Linotype Co. v. Hays, 181 S. W. 1183. Two opinions have been written in the case by the learned Springfield Court of. Appeals. [182 Mo. App. 113.] In the opinion last rendered but first above cited, references are made to the first opinion for many of the- facts and for much of the law.
It is urged by relator as his ground for quashal, that the opinion of the Court of Appeals is in conflict with, the ease of United Shoe Machinery Co. v. Ramlose, 210…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Milan Milling, etc., Co. v. GortenTennessee Supreme Court · 1894
- United Shoe Machinery Co. v. RamloseSupreme Court of Missouri · 1908
- Roeder v. RobertsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1907
- D. M. Osborne & Co. v. ShillingSupreme Court of Kansas · 1906
- Mergenthaler Linotype Co. v. HaysMissouri Court of Appeals · 1914
3Cited by15 opinions
- Superior Concrete Accessories, Inc. v. KemperSupreme Court of Missouri · 1955
- Goodwin Brothers Leasing, Inc. v. NousisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1977
- Hogan v. Intertype Corp.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1918
- Filmakers Releasing Organization v. Realart Pictures of St. Louis, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1964
- Century Distilling Co. v. DefenbachIdaho Supreme Court · 1940
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.