Slavens v. South Pacific R.R. Co.
| Decision Date | 31 January 1873 |
| Citation | 51 Mo. 308 |
| Parties | Z. L. SLAVENS, Respondent, v. SOUTH PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellant. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Laclede Circuit Court.
James Baker and J. N. Litton, for Appellant.
I. Appellant was within the meaning of the statute, a non-resident of Laclede county, but was a resident of St. Louis county. (Conn. R. R. vs. Cooper, 30 Vermont, 476; 2 Redf., on R. R., 384; Thorn vs. Central R. R., 2 Dutch N. J., 121; R. R. Co. vs. Alexandria, 17 Gratt., 76; Jenkins vs. California Stage Co., 22 Cal. 537; How., Pr., 149; Sangamon county R. R. vs. Morgan county 14 Ills., 166.)
J. D. Mathews, for Respondent.
I. Appellant was a resident of Laclede county within the meaning of Sec. 3, p 847, Wag. Stat. In legal contemplation a railroad resides in any county through which its road passes. WAGNER, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.
Plaintiff commenced his suit against the defendant before a justice of the peace in Laclede county, and summons was served upon defendant's station agent in that county.
At the trial, judgment was given for the plaintiff, and defendant at the time gave notice of its intention to take an appeal to the Circuit Court, but failed to file a bond or affidavit within ten days.
Thirteen days after the trial, affidavit and bond were filed, and the case was taken to the Circuit Court. In that court the plaintiff filed his motion to dismiss the appeal because the same was not taken and perfected within ten days. His motion was sustained, and defendant appealed to this court.
The only question is whether the defendant, whose track runs through Laclede county, is a resident or non-resident within the meaning of the act in reference to granting appeals.
The Statute provides that no appeal shall be allowed, unless it be made within ten days after the judgment rendered, or where judgment is by detault or non-suit, within ten days after the refusal of the justice to set aside the default or non-suit and grant a new trial; but if the party is a non-resident of the county where the suit is instituted, then he is allowed twenty days within which to make his appeal. (2 W. S., 847, § 3.)
Suits against corporations may be commenced in any county where such corporations have or usually keep an office or agent for the transaction of their usual and customary business. (1 W. S., 394, § 26, 28; Dixon vs. H. & St. Jo. R. R. Company, 31 Mo., 409.)
It seems to me upon a fair construction of the Statute that a corporation is a resident of the county through which its e of road passes, and in which it has an agent upon whom process can be served, and where suits are authorized to be commenced. It is true, upon this question there have been contradictory decisions.
In Vermont the court holds, that the residence of a railway company for the purpose of bringing actions, is the county or town upon the line of their road, where their principal office and the center of their business operations is situated. (Railroad Company vs. Cooper, 30 Vt., 476.) So in New Jersey it is held that in a suit brought against a corporation, the venue should be laid in the county where their principal office is located, that being considered their place of residence, and that the rule applies to railroad companies, where their road runs through, and their franchises are exercised in different counties. (Thorn vs. Central Railroad Company, 2 Dutch, 121.)
But in the case of the City of St. Louis vs. Wiggins Ferry Company, (40 Mo., 586) this court declared that there can be no doubt that, within the limits of the State which grants the charter, a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Sidway v. Missouri Land & Live Stock Company, Limited
-
State ex rel. Northwestern Mut. Fire Ass'n v. Cook
...only ten days to appeal from a judgment of the justice court, instead of twenty that is allowed nonresidents of the county. [Slavens v. South Pac. R. Co., 51 Mo. 308; Harding v. Chicago & Alton R. Co., 80 Mo. It is true the foregoing cases do not decide the exact question before us, as all ......
-
Julian v. Kansas City Star Co.
...an office or place of business, although the chief officer or president may not reside therein. Dixon v. Railroad, 31 Mo. 409; Slavens v. Railroad, 51 Mo. 308; Crutsinger v. Railroad, 82 Mo. 64. It will readily observed that in 1855, when railroads were first being constructed through the S......
-
State ex rel. Northwestern Mut. Fire Assn. v. Cook
...only ten days to appeal from a judgment of the justice court, instead of twenty that is allowed nonresidents of the county. [Slavens v. South Pac. R. Co., 51 Mo. 308; Harding v. Chicago & Alton R. Co., 80 Mo. It is true the foregoing cases do not decide the exact question before us, as all ......