Wolf v. Lancaster
| Decision Date | 20 November 1903 |
| Citation | 70 N.J.L. 201,56 A. 172 |
| Parties | WOLF v. LANCASTER et al. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Action by Elias Wolf against George W. Lancaster and others. Rule to show cause why a judgment should not be opened and set aside on petition of the Philadelphia Brewing Company. Rule discharged.
Argued June term, 1903, before VAN SYCKEL and FORT, JJ.
Charles C. Babcock and P. T. Shinn, for plaintiff.
Wilson, Carr & Stackbouse, for defendants.
VAN SYCKEL, J. This is a rule to show cause why a judgment should not be opened and set aside on the petition of the Philadelphia Brewing Company. The claim of the brewing company is on an account against Lancaster for beer sold to him before November 7, 1902. The certificate of the brewing company to do business in this state was granted by the Secretary of State November 7, 1902. The brewing company is a foreign corporation, and cannot maintain an action for sales made before November 7, 1902. P. L. 1896, pp. 307, 308, §§ 97, 100, 101. Section 101 imposes the same penalties as apply in Pennsylvania, where the brewing company is incorporated. Del. Riv. Quarry Co. y. Bethlehem Co. (Pa.) 53 Atl. 533. The brewing company cannot maintain an action for its claim, and therefore cannot maintain this rule.
The rule is discharged, with costs.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Tarr v. Western Loan & Savings Co.
... ... 358; Commonwealth Mut. F. Ins. Co. v. Edwards, 124 ... N.C. 116, 32 S.E. 404; Bank of British Columbia v ... Page, 6 Ore. 431; Wolf v. Lancaster, 70 N.J.L ... 201, 56 A. 172; Tabor v. Interstate Bldg. Co., 91 ... Tex. 92, 40 S.W. 954; Booth & Co. v. Weigand, 28 ... Utah 372, ... ...