Legal Opinion

West v. Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co.

U.S. Circuit Court for the Northern District of Georgia

Decided May 15, 1909PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

NEWMAN, District Judge.

The question now before the court in this case is on the sufficiency of the service. The suit was brought in the city court of Atlanta, and removed by the defendant corporation to this court. The defendant was served by serving Paul A. Wright, its commercial agent here. The language of the service is as follows:

“Georgia, Pulton County:
“Served the defendant, Cincinnati, New Orleans & Texas Pacific Railway Company, a corporation, by serving Paul A. Wright, its commercial agent, by leaving a copy of the within writ and process with him, in person, at the office and place…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Green v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1907
  2. Goldey v. Morning NewsSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
  3. Barrow Steamship Co. v. KaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
  4. Conley v. Mathieson Alkali WorksSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
  5. Forsyth v. HammondSupreme Court of the United States · 1897

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Perkins v. Louisville & N. R. Co.District Court, S.D. California · 1951
  2. Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. MeredithCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1941
  3. Stephan v. Union Pac. Ry. Co.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1921
  4. Southern Photo Material Co. v. Eastman Kodak Co. of New YorkDistrict Court, N.D. Georgia · 1916

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API