Collier v. Mutual Reserve Fund Life Ass'n

• Decision Date: 30 December 1902
• Citation: 119 F. 617
• Parties: COLLIER v. MUTUAL RESERVE FUND LIFE ASS'N.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Western District of Arkansas

119 F. 617

COLLIER v. MUTUAL RESERVE FUND LIFE ASS'N.

United States Circuit Court, W.D. Arkansas, Fort Smith Division.

December 30, 1902

Hill &amp Brizzolara, for plaintiff.

Rose Hemingway & Rose, for defendant.

ROGERS District Judge.

This suit was brought in the state court, and removed by the defendant to this court. A motion is now filed by the defendant to quash the service, for the reason, as alleged that at the time of said service it was not doing business in the state of Arkansas, nor did it have any agent therein. The record shows that the return of the sheriff is in due form and was made both upon Geo. B. Rose and upon T. C. Monroe, auditor of the state of Arkansas. A stipulation has been filed by which it is agreed:

'That the defendant company compiled with the statutes of Arkansas in regard to doing business in the state, and appointed Geo. B. Rose as its agent, upon whom service of process might be served, and gave bond to the state as required by statute, and while so doing business in the state issued the policy sued upon. That subsequent to the issuance of said policy the company revoked the power of its agents in the state of Arkansas, and revoked the appointment of said Geo. B. Rose, and after it revoked the appointment of its agents it collected its premiums on policies through local banks from its policy holders; and prior to the institution of this suit it ceased to collect through local banks, and sent notices direct to its policy holders to pay at the home office in New York, and the policy holders have done so under the direction of the defendant. That the defendant company has a large number of outstanding policies in the state, some ten of which are in the city of Ft. Smith, Ark., and it is regularly collecting premiums therefrom; and all of said policies were issued while said company was authorized to do business in the state. That no appointment of agents has been made since the revocation heretofore referred to, and no agent has been kept within the state for the service of process, unless the auditor of state and the said Geo. B. Rose are its agents under and by virtue of the statutes in such case.'

Section 4137, Sand. & H. Dig. Ark., provides as follows:

'No insurance company, not of this state, nor its agents, shall do business in this state, until it has filed with the auditor of this state a written stipulation, duly authenticated by the company, agreeing that any legal process affecting the company, served on the auditor or the party designated by him, or the agent specified by said company to receive service of process for the company, shall have the same effect as if served personally on the company within

...