Puerrung v. Carter-Crume Co.

Ohio Circuit Courts

Puerrung v. Carter-Crume Co.

16 Ohio C.C. 629

DecidedJanuary 15, 1898

StatusPublished

This text of 16 Ohio C.C. 629 (Puerrung v. Carter-Crume Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Circuit Courts primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Puerrung v. Carter-Crume Co., 16 Ohio C.C. 629 (Ohio Super. Ct. 1898).

Pincite

Opinion

Smith, J.;

Cox and Swing, JJ., concur.

We are of the opinion that the judgment in this case should be affirmed; that section 148c, Revised Statutes, which in effect provides that in actions brought in this state against foreign corporations which have complied with the provisions of said statute they shall not be subject to process of attachment, under section 5521, Revised Statutes, or any law of Ohio, on the ground that it is a foreign corporation or a non-resident of the state, is a valid and constitutional law.

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

Smith, J.;

Cox and Swing, JJ., concur.

We are of the opinion that the judgment in this case should be affirmed; that section 148c, Revised Statutes, which in effect provides that in actions brought in this state against foreign corporations which have complied with the provisions of said statute they shall not be subject to process of attachment, under section 5521, Revised Statutes, or any law of Ohio, on the ground that it is a foreign corporation or a non-resident of the state, is a valid and constitutional law.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 Ohio C.C. 629, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/puerrung-v-carter-crume-co-ohiocirct-1898.