Southern Photo Material Co. v. Eastman Kodak Co. of New York
| Decision Date | 20 July 1916 |
| Docket Number | 166. |
| Citation | 234 F. 955 |
| Parties | SOUTHERN PHOTO MATERIAL CO. v. EASTMAN KODAK CO. OF NEW YORK. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Georgia |
King & Spalding, of Atlanta, Ga., for plaintiff.
Smith Hammond & Smith, of Atlanta, Ga., for defendant.
This is a suit brought by the plaintiff against the defendant under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act of July 2, 1890, 26 Stat. 209 210, and the Clayton Act of October 15, 1914, 38 Stat. 730. The questions now considered are the jurisdiction of the court and the sufficiency of the service.
The Southern Photo Material Company is a Georgia corporation having its residence in the city of Atlanta, in the Northern District of Georgia. The Eastman Kodak Company is a corporation of the state of New York and a citizen and resident of that state, having its principal office in the city of Rochester.
There is a Georgia corporation in the city of Atlanta, known as the Glenn Photo Stock Company, the stock in which is owned by the Eastman Kodak Company of New Jersey, which is the same company that owns the stock of the Eastman Kodak Company of New York, the defendant here.
The first service in this case was perfected by serving W. Frank Luckiesh, manager of the Glenn Photo Stock Company. This service was traversed by the defendant, appearing for the purpose of objecting to the service.
Subsequent to this an order was made by the court authorizing service on the defendant by service at its principal office or place of business in the city of Rochester, N.Y., a copy of the petition and the amendment to the petition, and the process in the case, together with a copy of the order of the court providing for this service, to be sent to the United States Marshal for the Western District of New York to be served by him on the defendant company.
The United States Marshal for the Western District of New York has made return by his deputy of service of the petition, amendment to petition and order of court allowing the same, process and order of service, on George Eastman, treasurer of the Eastman Kodak Company of New York. After this the defendant renewed his plea to the jurisdiction and traverse as to this last service.
The Sherman Anti-Trust Act, of 1890, provided that a defendant might be sued in any Circuit Court of the United States (now District Court) 'in the district in which the defendant resides or is found. ' In the Clayton Act, of 1914, it is provided that a defendant may be sued 'not only in the judicial district whereof it is an inhabitant, but also in any district wherein it may be found or transacts business. ' The question discussed here is, whether suit may be brought in a district where the defendant 'transacts business,' although not 'found' in that district within the meaning of the decisions defining that term.
In this case the evidence shows that there are 126 regular customers of the defendant company in the state of Georgia, and that it has certain demonstrators who travel in Georgia and adjoining states for the purpose of demonstrating articles manufactured by the Eastman Kodak...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Eastman Kodak Co of New York v. Southern Photo Materials Co
...and moved to quash the service. The jurisdictional issues thus raised were tried by the judge, who overruled these defenses. (D. C.) 234 F. 955. The defendant, by leave of court, then answered on the merits. The trial to the court and jury resulted in a verdict for the plaintiff assessing i......
-
Haskell v. Aluminum Co. of America
...has been adopted by the federal courts in several cases. Venner v. Pennsylvania Steel Co. (D. C.) 250 F. 292; Southern Photo Material Co. v. Eastman Kodak Co. (D. C.) 234 F. 955; Eastman Kodak Co. v. Southern Photo Material Co. (C. C. A.) 295 F. 98; Frey & Son, Inc., v. Cudahy Packing Co. (......
-
Wainwright v. Pennsylvania R. Co.
... ... provisions was sustained in Southern Photo Material Co ... v. Eastman Kodak Co ... ...
-
United States v. CHASE SECURITIES CORPORATION
...them. Eastman Kodak Co. v. Southern Photo Materials Co., 273 U. S. 359, 47 S. Ct. 400, 71 L. Ed. 684. See same case for facts in (D. C.) 234 F. 955, 956. The judgment of the District Court is vacated, and the case is remanded to that court for further proceedings not inconsistent with this ......