Gordon Armstrong Co. v. Superior Court

The sole question presented by this proceeding is whether or not petitioner Gordon Armstrong Company, Inc., a foreign corporation, was “doing business in this State” in such manner and to such extent as to make it amenable to service of process and to the jurisdiction of our superior court.

Petitioner, a corporation organized under the laws of Ohio, is one of two defendants in an action brought in our superior court to recover damages for personal injuries. The plaintiffs are Donald Coulter, an infant, and his father, Fred Coulter. The defendants are the petitioner and St. John’s Hospital, a nonprofit corporation organized under the laws of California. The action is based upon injuries sustained by said infant as a result of a fire that occurred on June 22, 1955, in a baby incubator owned by the hospital and manufactured by petitioner. The complaint states causes of action (1) upon breach of an implied warranty of fitness and (2) upon negligence in the manufacture, sale, operation and use of the incubator.

Defendant St. John’s Hospital answered the first amended complaint on September 19, 1956. The order for substituted service upon petitioner providing for service upon the…

Upon the predicate that the “minimum contacts” doctrine supplies the definition of “doing business” under the law of California, I concur in the judgment. I do so with reluctance because of the belief that j judicial pronouncements have, in disregard of the legislative prerogative, overridden the terms of the local statute.

“Statutory authority is a necessary basis for service upon a foreign corporation. (Jameson v. Simonds Saw Co., 2 Cal.App. 582, 584 [ 84 P. 289 ]; Perkins v. Benguet Consol. Min. Co., 342 U.S. 437, 440, 446 [ 72 S.Ct. 413 , 96 L.Ed. 485 ].) And where the Legislature has provided for jurisdiction over a foreign corporation based upon something more than the minimum of due process (as that concept changes with the attrition of the years) it is not for the courts to set up some new and different standard.” (Confidential, Inc. v. Superior Court, 157 Cal.App.2d 75, 80 [ 320 P.2d 546 ].)

The codes are to be construed as a single statute. (Armenta v. Churchill, 42 Cal.2d 448, 455 [267 P.2d 303]; In re Porterfield, 28 Cal.2d 91, 100 [ 168 P.2d 706 , 167 A.L.R. 675 ].) This, of course, applies to the relationship between the Code of Civil Procedure and the Corporations…

Raoul D. Magana, Richard J. Collins, Daniel C. Olney and Victor E. Kaplan for Real Parties in Interest.

The sole question presented by this proceeding is whether or not petitioner Gordon Armstrong Company, Inc., a foreign corporation, was "doing business in this State" in such manner and to such extent as to make it amenable to service of process and to the jurisdiction of our superior court.

Petitioner, a corporation organized under the laws of Ohio, is one of two defendants in an action brought in our superior court to recover damages for personal injuries. The plaintiffs are Donald Coulter, an infant, and his father, Fred Coulter. The defendants are the petitioner and St. John's Hospital, a nonprofit corporation organized under the laws of California. The action is based upon injuries sustained by said infant as a result of a fire that occurred on June 22, 1955, in a baby incubator owned by the hospital and manufactured by petitioner. The complaint states causes of action (1) upon breach of an implied warranty of fitness and (2) upon negligence in the manufacture, sale, operation and use of the incubator.

Defendant St. John's Hospital answered the first amended…