WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
J. D. HISCOCK AND F. H. BOWE, DEFENDANTS IN ERROR
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Western Union Telegraph Company challenged a judgment for $2,843.90 awarded to J.D. Hiscock and F.H. Bowe for failure to transmit $150.00. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the judgment, finding the service of summons on Western Union was fatally defective because it was served on a mere manager without showing the absence of superior officers required by statute.
The service was unauthorized and ineffectual to give the court jurisdiction over the defendant company. Under Florida's statute regulating service of summons on private corporations, service on an inferior agent is improper without first showing the absence of all superior officers designated by statute.
“Under the statute regulating- the service of summons on private corporations, where the return shows service upon a mere agent of the defendant company, without showing the absence of all the officers of the company of the superior classes designated by the statute as those upon whom service shall be made, before resort is had to service upon one of an inferior class, -the service is unauthorized and ineffectual to give the court jurisdiction of the defendant company in the cause.”
Establishes the primary legal rule that service on an inferior agent is improper without first demonstrating the absence of superior officers.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJ.D. Hiscock filed suit as the sole plaintiff in the praecipe, with F.H. Bowe later joining in the declaration. The plaintiffs alleged Western Union f…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Service Of Process On Corporations cases and more on FLexlaw
Whitfield, J.
In the praecipe for summons ad res'. filed herein, J. D. Hiscock was the sole plaintiff. The summons issued on the praecipe was the only summons attempted to be served on the defendant corporation. The return is fatally defective in that it shows service on the “manager” of the defendant without showing the ab sence of superior officers. Drew Lumber Co. v. Walter, 45 Fla. 252, 34 South. Rep. 244.
Under the statute regulating-the service of summons on private corporations, where the return shows service upon a mere agent of the defendant company, without showing the absence of all the officers of the company of the superior classes designated by the statute as those upon whom service shall be made, before resort is had to service upon one of an inferior class, -the service is unauthorized and ineffectual to give the court jurisdiction of the defendant company in the cause. Milton Land & Inv. Co. v. Our Home Life Ins. Co., 81 Fla. 227, 87 South. Rep. 636; Seacoast Lumber Co. v. R. J. & B. F. Camp Lumber Co., 63 Fla. 604, 59 South. Rep. 13.
The declaration wherein J. D. Hiscock and F. H. Bowe are plaintiffs, alleges a failure to transmit $150.00 delivered to the defendant company for transmission, and a bill of particulars contains two items only, viz, $150.00 delivered for transmission, and $6.10 charges paid, making a total of $156.10.
A default judgment was entered against the defendant in favor of J. D. Hiscock only. .Apparently there was no appearance in the case by or for the defendant.
A jury returned a verdict for $2,843.90 in favor of J. D. Hiscock and F. H. Bowe plaintiffs. Judgment was rendered for $2,843.90, and costs, in favor of J. D. Hiscock and F. H. Bowe,, and the defendant took writ of error. On the transcript of the record as it is-filed in this court, the judgment is manifestly erroneous, and it is reversed.
Taylor;, C, J., and Ellis, Browne and West, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Milton Land & Inv. Co. v. Our Home Life Ins. Co., 81 Fla. 227 (Fla. 1921)
- Drew Lumber Co. v. Scotia Walter, 45 Fla. 252 (Fla. 1903)
- Seacoast Lumber Co. v. R. J. & B. F. Camp Lumber Co., 63 Fla. 604 (Fla. 1912)