Palmer v. Chicago Herald Co.

• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
• Citation: Palmer v. Chicago Herald Co., 70 F. 886 (S.D. N.Y. 1895)
• Decision Date: 04 October 1895
• Parties: PALMER v. CHICAGO HERALD CO. SAME v. CHICAGO EVENING POST CO.

70 F. 886

PALMER v. CHICAGO HERALD CO.

SAME v. CHICAGO EVENING POST CO.

United States Circuit Court, S.D. New York.

October 4, 1895

Wager Swayne, for the motion.

James R. Soley, opposed.

LACOMBE Circuit Judge.

The case principally relied upon-- Goldey v. Morning News, 156 U.S. 518, 15 Sup.Ct. 559-- decides that service upon an officer or agent of a foreign corporation who is only casually within the state, and not charged with any business of the corporation there, does not bind the corporation when it is not doing business within the state. Where, however, such foreign corporation carries on some substantial part of its business in the state by means of an agent or representative appointed to act there, it impliedly assents to be found there. It is sometimes not easy to determine what acts constitute a 'carrying on business' within the meaning of the authorities. In U.S. v. American Bell Tel. Co., 29 F. 17, and N K. Fairbank & Co. v. Cincinnati, N.O. & T.P. Ry. Co., 4 C.C.A. 403, 54 F. 420, there will be found careful discussions of the principles which underlie the rule. In the case at bar it appears that the defendant in each suit has continuously in this state an agent, who solicits advertisements for defendant's paper, and who has authority to contract on behalf of defendant with persons offering advertisements to publish the same in...