Richardson v. Frigidaire Corporation

167 S.E. 681, 168 S.C. 473, 1933 S.C. LEXIS 29
Supreme Court of South Carolina·Decided February 3, 1933·No. 13573·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Ci-iiEE Justice BeEase.

The appealing defendant, Frigidaire Corporation, sued by the plaintiff, in the county Court of Richland County, appeared for the sole purpose of objecting to the jurisdiction of the Court, and moved for an order vacating and setting aside the attempted service of the summons and *476 complaint in the action on it. It contended that it was a foreign corporation, not doing business in this state, and that J. R. Little, upon whom the summons and complaint were served, was not its agent.

The county Judge, Hon. M. S. Whaley, decided against the contentions of the appellant, and held that the service was valid and that the Court had jurisdiction.

The appeal involves two questions of fact: First, was the appellant doing business in this state at the time of the attempted service ? And, second, was Little its duly authorized agent at the time the service of the summons and complaint were made on him ?

There was sufficient evidence submitted to the county Judge to sustain his conclusions. That being so,.his order, appealed from, which will be reported, is affirmed.

Messrs. Justices Stabler and Bonham, and Mr. Acting Associate Justice C. C. Featherstone, Circuit Judge, concur.

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

Richardson v. Frigidaire Corporation, 167 S.E. 681, 168 S.C. 473, 1933 S.C. LEXIS 29 (S.C. 1933).

167 S.E. 681 (Richardson v. Frigidaire Corporation) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Thompson v. Ford Motor Company
21 S.E.2d 34 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1942)
McNeely v. Fidelity Mutual Benefit Ass'n
182 S.E. 425 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1935)
Dyar v. Georgia Power Co.
176 S.E. 711 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1934)