Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Henry
| Decision Date | 27 November 1933 |
| Docket Number | 4-3311 |
| Parties | PACIFIC MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY v. HENRY |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
Prohibition to Ashley Circuit Court; Patrick Henry, Judge writ denied.
Writ denied.
Powell Smead & Knox and Owens & Ehrman, for petitioner.
U J. Cone, for respondent.
A resident of Ashley County brought suit in the Ashley Circuit Court against petitioner to recover damages for injuries alleged to have been sustained by its negligence in an automobile accident in Pulaski County while being transported to the latter county by it as a witness. Service of summons was had upon petitioner's designated agent for service in Pulaski County, who was also its general State agent.
Petitioner specially appeared in the Ashley Circuit Court, and moved to quash the service on the ground that it is a foreign corporation authorized to do business in Arkansas; that it maintained no office or agent in Ashley County upon whom service of summons could be had; and that the attempted service upon its designated agent in Pulaski County was unreasonable, discriminatory, arbitrary and in violation of the due process clause of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
A hearing was had on the motion to quash, and it was developed that petitioner does have an agent in Ashley County, appointed by the general agent in Little Rock, with authority to solicit applications for life insurance policies to be issued by petitioner, and that it is doing business in Ashley County by writing insurance on residents of that county on applications taken by such agency. The motion to quash was overruled, and this petition for prohibition challenges the jurisdiction of the respondent's court to hear and determine the matter.
We think the court correctly overruled the motion to quash, and that the Ashley Circuit Court has acquired jurisdiction by the service had under either §§ 1150, 1151 or 1152 Crawford & Moses' Digest. Under § 1150 the service might have been had "upon the chief officer of such agency," petitioner being an incorporated insurance company. Under § 1151 service is authorized on the designated agent, as was done in this case, petitioner being a foreign corporation with an agent in this State. Under § 1152, both foreign and domestic corporations may be sued in any county where they keep or maintain "a branch office or other place of business," and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mutual Benefit Health & Accident Association v. Kincannon
... ... J ... ... Petitioner insurance company asks that we prohibit the Logan ... circuit court ... sanatorium ... Metropolitan ... Life Insurance Co. v. Baker, 197 Ark. 61, 122 ... S.W.2d 951, ... filed. In Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Company v ... Henry, 188 Ark. 262, ... ...
-
Grovey v. Washington National Insurance Co.
... ... 697 GROVEY v. WASHINGTON NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY 4-5145Supreme Court of ArkansasJuly 4, 1938 ... agent to sell life insurance policies issued by appellee and ... by the other ... Ark. 533, 66 S.W.2d 616, and the Pacific Mutual Life Ins ... Co. v. Henry, 188 Ark. 262, 65 S.W.2d ... ...
-
Mutual Ben. Health & Accident Ass'n v. Kincannon
...through summons served on a soliciting agent residing in the county where the suit is filed. In Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Henry, 188 Ark. 262, 65 S.W.2d 32, the holding is (quoting a headnote) that: "Under Crawford & Moses' Dig., §§ 1151, 1152,3 service of summons on a foreig......
- Arkansas Power & Light Company v. Boyd