Lagergren v. Pennsylvania Railroad
This text of 152 N.W. 1102 (Lagergren v. Pennsylvania Railroad) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The summons in this action was served upon a resident soliciting freight agent of defendant, a foreign corporation. Defendant appeared specially and moved to set the service aside, on the ground, that it conferred no jurisdiction over the person of defendant and; [36]*36was not due process of law within the meaning of the Federal Constitution. The motion was denied and defendant appealed.
The case is controlled by the decision in Armstrong v. New York Central & H. R. R. Co. 129 Minn. 104, 151 N. W. 917, where substantially the same question was presented. North Wisconsin Cattle Co. v. Oregon Short Line R. Co. 105 Minn. 198, 117 N. W. 391, is not in point. That decision was rendered prior to the amendment of the statute providing for the service of process upon foreign corporations. Chapter 218, p. 274, Laws 1913. The case of Simon v. Southern Ry. Co. 236 U. S. 115, is, on its facts, unlike the case at bar, and therefore not controlling.
Order affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
152 N.W. 1102, 130 Minn. 35, 1915 Minn. LEXIS 507, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lagergren-v-pennsylvania-railroad-minn-1915.