TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Herriage v. Texas & P. Ry. Co.

Herriage v. Tex. & P. Ry. Co., 11 F.2d 671 (W.D. La. 1926)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Federal District Courts
Decided
March 10, 1926
Docket
No. 1584
Judges
Dawkins
Citations
11 F.2d 6711926 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1033

Opinion of the Court — Dawkins

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

DAWKINS, District Judge.

This ease has been submitted upon a motion to quash the citation. The suit is one for damages because of illness alleged to have been occasioned by the failure of defendant to properly heat one of its coaches, upon which the petitioner was traveling as a passenger. It is alleged that the defendant is a citizen of the state of Texas, but that it has an agent for the service of process in the city of New Orleans, La. The prayer is for service according to law, hut the citation was directed to the defendant, through its said agent, in the city of New Orleans, which is situated iu the Eastern district of this state, and was sent to and served by the marshal of that district.

No provision of law has been cited by plaintiff to sustain this service. Even as to suits of local nature, Congress found it necessary to make special provision for service by the marshal of another district, where the defendant resided in such district in the same state. Section 54 of the Judicial Code (Comp. St. § 1036). Section 51 (Comp. St. § 1033) does permit the bringing of suits, such as this, in the district of the domicile of either the plaintiff or defendant, but this does not enlarge the power of one court to send its process for service in another. As to foreign or nonresident corporations, in the absence of a federal statute, the law of the state is followed for making service; but this does not carry the light to a federal District Court to send its process beyond its territorial limits. See Compiled Statutes Annotated, vol. 3 (1916) p. 2949.

For the reasons assigned, the motion to quash should be sustained, with reservation to plaintiff of the right to have additional and proper service made.

How later courts describe this case

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

1936: 11938: 11940: 119362026peak 1936 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Keller v. American Sales Book Co.16 F. Supp. 189 (W.D.N.Y. 1936)
  2. Junk v. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.24 F. Supp. 716 (W.D. Va. 1938)
  3. Koncewicz v. East Liverpool City Hospital31 F. Supp. 122 (W.D. Pa. 1940)

Most recent

  1. Koncewicz v. East Liverpool City Hospital31 F. Supp. 122 (W.D. Pa. 1940)
  2. Junk v. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.24 F. Supp. 716 (W.D. Va. 1938)
  3. Keller v. American Sales Book Co.16 F. Supp. 189 (W.D.N.Y. 1936)

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 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

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