Scranton Grain Co. v. Lubbock Mach. & Supply Co., 8658
Decision Date | 30 March 1971 |
Docket Number | No. 8658,8658 |
Citation | 186 N.W.2d 449 |
Court | North Dakota Supreme Court |
Parties | SCRANTON GRAIN COMPANY, a corporation, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. LUBBOCK MACHINE & SUPPLY COMPANY, a corporation, Lubbock Manufacturing Company, Inc., a corporation, Fargo Foundry Steel & Manufacturing Co., a corporation, and Scranton Equity Exchange, a corporation, Defendants. ROPER HYDRAULICS, INC., a corporation, and Roper Industries, Inc., a corporation, Defendants and Respondents, v. LUBBOCK MACHINE & SUPPLY COMPANY, a corporation, Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff, v. L. P. GAS TRANSPORT CO., Carl J. Austad & Son, a corporation, and Scranton Equity Exchange, a cooperative association, Third-Party Defendants. Civ. |
Syllabus by the Court
1. No part of the North Dakota Century Code is retroactive unless it is expressly declared to be so. § 1--02--10, N.D.C.C.
2. Section 28--06.1--02, N.D.C.C., is subject to § 1--02--10, N.D.C.C., and because § 28--06.1--02 does not contain a savings clause, it does not have a retrospective effect.
3. For the reasons stated in the opinion, § 28--06.1--02, N.D.C.C., does not have a retrospective effect and, therefore, the order of the district court is affirmed.
Mackoff, Kellogg, Kirby & Kloster, Dickinson, and Heineke, Schrader, Marsch & Cuncannan, Chicago, Ill., for plaintiff and appellant.
Zuger, Bucklin, Kelsch & Zuger, Bismarck, for defendants and respondents.
The essential facts of this case were stated by this court in Scranton Grain Co. v. Lubbock Machine & Supply Co. (and others, including Roper Hydraulics, Inc., and Roper Industries, Inc.), 167 N.W.2d 748, at 749--750 (N.D.1969), as follows:
'* * * it being understood that the District Sales Manager is carrying out this agreement as an independent operation and not as a branch office of Roper; * * *'
The contract also provided:
'Service of process was made upon the defendants Roper as foreign corporations, by mailing a copy of the summons and complaint to Roper Industries, Inc., 340 Blackhawk Park Avenue, Rockford, Illinois, and to Roper Hydraulics, Inc., 340 Blackhawk Park Avenue, Rockford, Illinois, postage paid, certified mail, return receipt requested.
'This service, it is asserted, gave the court jurisdiction over the defendants Roper under that portion of Section 10--22--10, North Dakota Century Code, which reads:
'Whenever a claim shall arise out of business transacted in this state by a foreign corporation transacting business without a certificate of authority, service of process may be made * * * by mailing a copy thereof to the defendant corporation by registered or certified mail at its last known post office address.'
'From the order dismissing the action and quashing the service of summons, the plaintiff and the cross-appellant, Scranton Equity Exchange, have taken this appeal, demanding trial de novo.'
In affirming the district court, this court, in paragraphs 2 and 3 of the syllabus in Scranton Grain Co. v. Lubbock Machine & Supply Co., Supra 167 N.W.2d at 749, held:
Chapter 28--06.1, N.D.C.C., Service of Process On and Jurisdiction Over Nonresidents, became effective on July 1, 1969, after having been enacted by the 1969 Legislature of North Dakota. This chapter is commonly known as the 'long-arm statute'. The sections in this chapter are:
'28--06.1--01. Definition of person--As used in this chapter, the word 'person', whether or not a citizen or resident of this state, and whether or not organized under the laws of this state includes an individual whether operating in his own name or under his trade name, an individual's agent or personal representative, a...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Vasquez v. Falcon Coach Co., Inc.
...§ 28-06.1-02 to the Scranton Grain Co. facts was considered by the Supreme Court of North Dakota in 1971. Scranton Grain Co. v. Lubbock Machine & Supply Co., 186 N.W.2d 449 (N.D. 1971). There was no issue raised as to the sufficiency of contacts under § 28-06.1-02, as a basis for service on......
-
Reiling v. Bhattacharyya, 9537
...69, 71 (N.D.1975); Heddon v. North Dakota Workmen's Comp. Bureau, 189 N.W.2d 634, 637 (N.D.1971); Scranton Grain Co. v. Lubbock Machine & Supply Co., 186 N.W.2d 449, 453 (N.D.1971); Monson v. Nelson, 145 N.W.2d 892, 897-898 (N.D.1966); and Gimble v. Montana-Dakota Utilities Co., 77 N.D. 581......
-
State v. Kaufman, Cr. N
...802 (N.D.1978); Heddon v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau, 189 N.W.2d 634, 638 (N.D.1971); Scranton Grain Co. v. Lubbock Machine and Supply Co., 186 N.W.2d 449, 453 (N.D.1971). The 1981 amendment to § 12.1-23-05, N.D.C.C., was not expressly declared to have retroactive applicatio......
-
State v. Unterseher
...expressly declares that such provision should be given a retroactive application. § 1-02-10, N.D.C.C.; Scranton Grain Co. v. Lubbock Machine & Supply Co., 186 N.W.2d 449, 453 (N.D.1971), and cases cited therein. Absent express declaration by our Legislature that § 14-17-14, N.D.C.C., is to ......