F. W. Myers & Co. v. Piche

Decision Date30 April 1969
Docket NumberNo. 5859,5859
PartiesF. W. MYERS & CO. v. Francis J. PICHE, d/b/a Piche's Ski Shop.
CourtNew Hampshire Supreme Court

Paul A. Rinden, Concord, for plaintiff.

Normandin, McIntyre, Cheney & O'Neil and David O. Huot, Laconia, for defendant.

GRIMES, Justice.

This is an action in assumpsit for duty paid by the plaintiff on behalf of the defendant on a shipment of ski boots purchased by defendant from a Canadian firm. The plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment, and the defendant filed a counter-affidavit. At the hearing on this motion, the defendant moved to dismiss on the ground that the plaintiff had not registered to do business in this state under RSA ch. 300. The Trial Court (Flynn, J.) granted the motion but provided that if the ruling is reversed, there should be judgment in the amount of the specification, and transferred the exception of the plaintiff.

The plaintiff is a corporation engaged in business as a customs broker at Rouses Point, New York, and elsewhere. According to the agreed statement of facts, it is the practice in the import business for the carrier to select a broker. The broker pays the custom duty assessed by the customs office subject to later revision, and the amount so paid is added to the shipping costs and collected by the carrier from the purchaser. 19 U.S.C. § 1505. If there is an upward revision of the custom duty on later calculations, the broker pays the added amount and bills the purchaser.

In the present case, the plaintiff was designated as the broker by the carrier and after payment of the original amount assessed, which was collected by the carrier, the plaintiff paid an additional $95.15 and billed the defendant. On failure of payment, this action was brought.

RSA 300:3 provides that every foreign corporation with certain exceptions not here applicable 'desiring to do business in this state' shall pay a registration fee and a maintenance fee and maintain a registered office, or a resident agent who may be the Secretary of State. Section 8 provides that failure to comply shall not affect the validity of any contract with such corporation 'but no action shall be maintained or recovery had in any of the courts of this state by any such foreign corporation so long as it fails to comply with the requirements of this chapter.'

The activity required to constitute 'doing business' under this type of statute is greater than that which will subject a foreign corporation to the jurisdiction of the courts of state. Eljam Mason Supply, Inc. v. Donnelly Brick Company, 152 Conn. 483, 208 A.2d 544; Rock-ola Manufacturing Corp. v. Wertz, 4 Cir., 249 F.2d...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Rochester Capital Leasing Corp. v. Sprague
    • United States
    • Arizona Court of Appeals
    • 10 Septiembre 1970
    ...The Corporation Journal 163--166 (No. 9, 1961); Humboldt Foods, Inc. v. Massey, 297 F.Supp. 236 (N.D. Miss.1968); F. W. Myers & Co. v. Piche, 109 N.H. 357, 252 A.2d 427 (1969). As stated in Filmakers Releasing Organization v. Realart Pictures, 'This much seems to be clear that the greatest ......
  • R. C. Allen Business Machines, Inc. v. Acres
    • United States
    • New Hampshire Supreme Court
    • 29 Julio 1971
    ...by such corporations which arise out of intrastate transactions which fall within the purview of RSA ch. 300. Myers Company v. Piche, 109 N.H. 357, 252 A.2d 427 (1969). In other words, the provisions of RSA 300:8 do not apply to actions by foreign corporations arising out of transactions in......
  • Pistorino & Co. v. Style Leather Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • 23 Marzo 1972
    ...the Federal customs laws. See Union Brokerage Co. v. Jensen, 322 U.S. 202, 204--206, 64 S.Ct. 967, 88 L.Ed. 1227; F. W. Myers & Co. v. Piche, 109 N.H. 357, 359, 252 A.2d 427. 2. The judge's subsidiary findings are justified by the reported evidence, much of it oral, including the testimony ......
  • Guyette v. C & K Development Co.
    • United States
    • New Hampshire Supreme Court
    • 14 Octubre 1982
    ...is greater than that which will subject a foreign corporation to the jurisdiction of the courts of this State. Myers Company v. Piche, 109 N.H. 357, 358, 252 A.2d 427, 428 (1969). In Piche, the plaintiff was a broker in New York who billed a New Hampshire consignee on a shipment of goods fr......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT