Drew Lumber Co. v. Walter
Citations
- 45 Fla. 252
Syllabus
<p>1. The provision in section 1019 of the Revised Statutes that service of process upon a corporation may he made hy serving the writ upon certain of its officers or agents, in the absence of certain other designated representatives, is mandatory in its character, and, in order to bind a eorpoiation hy such service, the return of the officer serving the process must affirmatively show the absence from the county where the suit was instituted of all officers of a superior class designated in the statute as those upon whom service shall be had, before resort Is had to service upon one of an inferior class.</p> <p>2. The absence of all members of a superior class Is a condition precedent to the validity of service upon a member of an inferior class.</p> <p>3. A judgment rendered against a defendant corporation upon such defective service, said corporation never having voluntarily appeared so as to give the court jurisdiction. But having entered a special appearance for the purpose of moving to quash the service, must be reversed.</p> <p>4. The prosecution of a writ of error from such a judgment operates, however, as a ¿general appearance wlnyl the cause is remanded to the court below.</p>
Judges: Glen
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
9 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Bank of Jasper v. First Nat. Bank of RomeSupreme Court· 1922-02-27· cited 29×
- Dade Erection Serv. v. Sims Crane Serv.District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1980-01-30· cited 19×
- Largay Enterprises Inc. v. BermanSupreme Court of Florida· 1952-10-17· cited 13×
- Ludlum Enterprises, Inc. v. Outdoor Media, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1971-07-26· cited 12×
- Putnam Lumber Co. v. Ellis-Young Co.Supreme Court of Florida· 1905-06-15· cited 5×
- Busard v. Houston ex rel. HoustonSupreme Court of Florida· 1913-05-28· cited 5×
- Seacoast Lumber Co. v. R. J. & B. F. Camp Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Florida· 1912-01-15· cited 3×
- Western Union Telegraph Co. v. HiscockSupreme Court of Florida· 1923-04-28
- Pentecostal Holiness Church, Inc. v. MauneyDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1969-03-13
Cites
7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Standley v. ArnowSupreme Court of Florida· 1869-07-01· cited 22×
- Toledo, Wabash, & Western Railway Co. v. OwenIndiana Supreme Court· 1873-11-15· cited 22×
- Cairo & Fulton Railroad v. TroutSupreme Court of Arkansas· 1877-11-15· cited 19×
- Arkansas Coal, Gas, Fire-Clay & Manufacturing Co. v. HaleySupreme Court of Arkansas· 1896-03-07· cited 11×
- Chicago Planing Mill Co. v. Merchants' National BankIllinois Supreme Court· 1877-09-15· cited 8×
- Southern Express Co. v. HuntMississippi Supreme Court· 1877-10-15· cited 3×
- St. Louis, Alton & Terre Haute Railroad v. DorseyIllinois Supreme Court· 1868-01-15· cited 2×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.