Shearer v. Farmers Life Insurance

Citations

• 106 Kan. 574
• 189 P. 648
• 1920 Kan. LEXIS 607

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Foreign Insurance Company — Jurisdiction—Conditions Under Which Service May Be Made on Superintendent of Insurance. Inasmuch as the statute provides that it is only in the county in which the plaintiff resides, or in which the cause of action arose, that a suit against a foreign corporation may he begun in this state by the service of summons on the superintendent of insurance, where neither of such conditions exists service made in that manner is ineffective.</p> <p>2. Same — Contract for Services — Place “Where Cause of Action Arose.” Where a written contract to pay an agreed compensation for certain services, a part of which are to be performed in Kansas, is executed in another state between a resident thereof and a corporation of a third state, a cause of action against the corporation, based upon its failure to pay for the plaintiff’s services according to the agreement, cannot be regarded as having arisen in a county of this state by virtue of the fact that a part of the services were to be performed therein.</p> <p>3. Same — No General Appearance Effected. A general appearance is not effected by the insertion, in a motion to set aside the service of summons, of allegations concerning some of the facts on which the plaintiff’s claim is founded, which are made because of their bearing upon the validity of the service, and which are material to that question.</p> <p>4. Same — Plea in Abatement — Special Appearance — No Submission to Court’s Jurisdiction. Where a defendant upon a special appearance objects to the service, he does not lose the right to have the overruling of his objection reviewed on appeal by afterward filing a plea in abatement in which jurisdictional and non jurisdictional matters are united, or by contesting the plaintiff’s claim on its merits.</p> <p>5. Same — Allegations of Answer — No General Appearance. A defendant who has properly preserved for review the question of the validity of the service is not t