TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

M. Wharton Young v. Albert Pick Hotels, a Corporation

M. Wharton YOUNG, Appellant, v. ALBERT PICK HOTELS, a Corporation, Appellee

M. Wharton Young v. Hotels, 375 F.2d 331 (D.C. Cir. 1967)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
February 23, 1967
Docket
No. 19810
Judges
Bazelon, Edger-Ton, Fahy, Per Curiam
Citations
375 F.2d 331126 U.S. App. D.C. 1551967 U.S. App. LEXIS 7326

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM:

The question is whether the District Court was right in quashing attempted service of a complaint and summons upon Albert Pick Hotels, defendant, appellee in this court. The complaint involved conduct allegedly injurious to plaintiff, appellant, attributed to the Pick-Congress Hotel, located in Chicago. Service was attempted upon the Assistant Manager of the Pick-Lee House, located in Washington, one of a chain of hotels known as the Albert Pick Hotels, to which the Pick-Congress Hotel also belonged. The defendant Albert Pick Hotels is a management corporation, separate in corporate status from the several corporations operating the individual hotels in the chain.

Defendant corporation solicits and confirms reservations for hotels in the chain and maintains an office in the Pick-Lee House in Washington. Though we therefore assume arguendo that defendant could be served with process in this juris *332 diction, 1

the Assistant Manager of Pick-Lee House, the person attempted to be served, was not an employee of defendant; nor does the evidence show that he or the Pick-Lee House was an agent of defendant upon whom service binding upon defendant could be made.

Affirmed.

1

. A local advertisement introduced in evidence following our remand when the case was here before, Young v. Albert Pick Hotels, 115 U.S.App.D.C. 400 , 320 F.2d 719 , gives some support to this position.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1969: 21970: 11971: 21977: 11979: 119692026peak 1969 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Gottlieb v. Sandia American Corp.452 F.2d 510 (3d Cir. 1971)
  2. Stoehr v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc.429 F. Supp. 763 (D. Neb. 1977)
  3. Grantham v. Challenge-Cook Bros.420 F.2d 1182 (7th Cir. 1970)
  4. Else v. Inflight Cinema International, Inc.465 F. Supp. 1239 (W.D. Pa. 1979)
  5. M. Wharton Young v. Pick Hotels-Washington Corporation420 F.2d 247 (D.C. Cir. 1969)
  6. Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 92,971452 F.2d 510 (3d Cir. 1971)

Most recent

  1. Else v. Inflight Cinema International, Inc.465 F. Supp. 1239 (W.D. Pa. 1979)
  2. Stoehr v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc.429 F. Supp. 763 (D. Neb. 1977)
  3. Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 92,971452 F.2d 510 (3d Cir. 1971)
  4. Gottlieb v. Sandia American Corp.452 F.2d 510 (3d Cir. 1971)
  5. Grantham v. Challenge-Cook Bros.420 F.2d 1182 (7th Cir. 1970)
  6. Grantham v. Challenge-Cook Bros.420 F.2d 1182 (7th Cir. 1969)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
M. Wharton Young v. Hotels, 320 F.2d 719 (D.C. Cir. 1963) 5

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list