Placek v. American Life Ins. Co.
| Decision Date | 18 April 1923 |
| Docket Number | 7398. |
| Parties | PLACEK v. AMERICAN LIFE INS. CO. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Washington |
Reynolds Ballinger & Hutson, of Seattle, Wash., for plaintiff.
Carr Cox, Evans & Riley, of Des Moines, Iowa, and Burkheimer & Burkheimer, of Seattle, Wash., for defendant.
Plaintiff a citizen of the state of Washington, sued the defendant, a citizen of Iowa, in the state court. The cause was removed to this court. The suit is on a contract made outside of the state of Washington, to be performed outside this state. Service of process was made upon the insurance commissioner of the state of Washington. Defendant moves to quash the service.
The statute of the state of Washington provides:
' Section 7044, Remington's Comp. Stats.
The instrument executed by the defendant, appointing the insurance commissioner to accept service of process, recites that service upon the Commissioner--
'shall * * * be deemed personal service upon the company, so long as it shall have any liabilities outstanding in the state of Washington.'
The defendant, at the time of the commencement of the action, it is stated in plaintiff's affidavit filed herein-- 'had, and has, outstanding in said state, certain policies of insurance granted to residents of said state upon which said policies of insurance the persons so insured by defendant paid to defendant, and now pay to defendant, premiums at stated intervals, and at the time of the commencement of this action defendant had, ever since has, and now has, outstanding liabilities in the state of Washington.'
In Robert Mitchell Furniture Co. v. Selden Breck Construction Co., 42 Sup.Ct. 84, 66 L.Ed. 201 (decided by the United States Supreme Court, December 5, 1921), the defendant had terminated its business in the state of Ohio before service of summons upon its agent appointed for service. In that case the court says:
'* * * The indications of the Ohio statutes, so far as they go, look to 'liability incurred within this state."
And:
'* * * Of course when a foreign corporation appoints one as required by statute it takes the risk of the construction that will be put upon the statute and the scope of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Orange Theatre Corp. v. Rayherstz Amusement Corp.
...appearance in the action which gave the court power to adjudicate the controversy to which they were parties. Placek v. American Life Ins. Co., D.C. Wash.1923, 288 F. 987. The question then arises whether by thus voluntarily placing themselves under the court's power the individual defendan......
-
Feldman Inv. Co. v. Connecticut General Life Ins. Co.
...788; Murphy v. Herring-Hall-Marvin Safe Co. (C. C.) 184 F. 495; Hoyt v. Ogden Portland Cement Co. (C. C.) 185 F. 889; Placek v. American Life Ins. Co. (D. C.) 288 F. 987; Brookings State Bank v. Federal Reserve Bank (D. C.) 291 F. 659; Briggs v. Stroud (C. C.) 58 F. 717; Everett Ry., Light ......
-
State ex rel. American Central Life Insurance Company v. Landwehr
...too, of where the contracts are made; otherwise, the statute would not apply to "all actions," but to "some actions" only. Placek v. Am. Life Ins. Co., 288 F. 987. Blair, J. Original proceeding in prohibition. Our provisional rule, including an attached copy of the petition theretofore file......
-
Atkins v. Bender
...State Bank v. Federal Reserve Bank (D. C.) 291 F. 659; Panama Railroad Co. v. Johnson (C. C. A.) 289 F. 981; Placek v. American Life Insurance Co. (D. C.) 288 F. 987; Stringfellow v. Nowlin Bros., 157 La. 683, 102 So. 869; Iddle v. Hamler, 132 La. 476, 61 So. 532; Whited & Wheless v. Calhou......