Legal Opinion
Schenstrom v. Continental Machines, Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided March 3, 1947PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RIFKIND, District Judge.
By an order to show cause defendant, Continental Machines, Inc., has brought on a motion to set aside the service of the summons on the ground that it was not served upon a person authorized to receive it under Rule 4(d) (3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c.1
The summons and complaint were served by delivery to one, H. C. Alpaugh, on November 15, 1945, within the Southern District. The complaint alleges diversity of citizenship as the basis of federal jurisdiction.
The action is for breach of a contract alleged to have been made…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- New Colonial Ice Co. v. HelveringSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Cannon Manufacturing Co. v. Cudahy Packing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1925
- People's Tobacco Co. v. American Tobacco Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1918
- Berkey v. Third Avenue Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1926
- Peterson v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1907
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Control Data Corp. v. Carolina Power & Light Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1967
- Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co. v. South Portland Engineering Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1966
- State Street Trust Co. v. British Overseas Airways Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1956
- Bergholt v. Hudson Motor Car Co.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1954
- Lane v. Maple Leaf Milling Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1949
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.