Roehl

Roehl v. the Texas Co.

Good Law
107 Cal. App. 691·1930 Cal. App. LEXIS 323·291 P. 255
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 16, 1930Docket No. 264.California6,129 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Haines, J.

The complaint of plaintiff and respondent John F. M. Roehl in the above cause having on July 26, 1928, been filed in the superior court, summons issued thereon and service was one day later attempted on defendant and appellant The Texas Company by delivery in San Diego County of a copy of the same annexed to a copy of the complaint to one C. L. Lorden, stated in the sheriff’s return to be its “district managing agent.” Defendant (now appellant) not having appeared or answered, its default was entered on August 9, 1928, and judgment against it followed on August 11, 1928.

Subsequently, on August 27, 1928, appellant, pursuant to notice of motion regularly given, appearing specially, moved the court to quash the service on the ground that appellant is a corporation incorporated under the laws of California and that, at the date service was attempted, Lorden was not an officer nor president or other head of said corporation, nor a vice-president, secretary, assistant secretary, cashier or managing agent thereof. The court had before it in considering the motion the complaint, summons and return, judgment, appellant’s notice of motion, the affidavit of one George G. Walker in support…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.