Conley v. Mathieson Alkali Works
190 U.S. 406 (1903)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Conley v. Mathieson Alkali Works, 190 U.S. 406 (1903)

Conley v. Mathieson Alkali Works

No. 238

Argued April 15-16, 1903

Decided May 18, 1903

190 U.S. 406

Syllabus

Granting the existence of a cause of action, it is not every service upon an officer of a corporation which will give a state court jurisdiction of a foreign corporation. The residence of an officer of a corporation does not necessarily give the corporation a domicil in the state. He must be there officially, representing the corporation in its business. Goldey v. Morning News,156 U. S. 518.

Service in New York of a summons upon a director of a foreign corporation who resides in New York is not sufficient to bring the corporation into court where, at the time of service, the corporation was not doing business in the New York.

See also Geer v. Mathieson Alkali Works, post, p. 190 U. S. 428.

The case is stated in the opinion of the Court.

Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.