New Orleans & Memphis Packet Co. v. James

32 F. 21, 1887 U.S. App. LEXIS 2710
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Louisiana·Decided June 1, 1887·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Billings, J.

To the plaintiffs’ claim defendant interposes the exception that the plaintiffs, chartered or existing under the laws of the state [22]*22of Kentucky, Rave failed to comply with the provisions of article 236 of the constitution of the state of Louisiana, which provides that no foreign corporation shall do any business in this state without having one or more known places of business, and an authorized agent or agents in the state upon whom process may be served. Held, that the provision of the constitution of Louisiana referred -to, being an attempt on the part of the state to interpose a restriction on navigation, and therefore in conflict with the provisions of the act of congress approved February 18, 1793, passed in pursuance of a clear authority under the constitution of the United States, is null and void. Sinnot v. Davenport, 22 How. 227.

Exception overruled, and judgment rendered in favor of plaintiffs in each cause.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

New Orleans & Memphis Packet Co. v. James, 32 F. 21, 1887 U.S. App. LEXIS 2710 (circtedla 1887).

32 F. 21 (New Orleans & Memphis Packet Co. v. James) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ryman Steamboat Line v. Commonwealth
101 S.W. 403 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1907)
Julius Kessler & Co. v. E. F. Perilloux & Co.
127 F. 1011 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Louisiana, 1902)