From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Walker v. P. Ballantine Sons

United States District Court, M.D. North Carolina
Mar 22, 1957
149 F. Supp. 379 (M.D.N.C. 1957)

Opinion

No. 1051-G.

March 22, 1957.

Clyde Rollins, L. Herbin, Greensboro, N.C., for plaintiff.

Brooks, McLendon, Brim Holderness, Greensboro, N.C., for defendant.


In view of the recent decision by this court in Erlanger Mills v. Cohoes Fiber Mills, 4 Cir., 239 F.2d 502, and of the Supreme Court of North Carolina in Putnam v. Publications, 245 N.C. 432, 96 S.E.2d 445, it is unnecessary to assign reasons why the motion to dismiss must be granted in the instant case. Painter v. Finance Co., 245 N.C. 576, 96 S.E.2d 731 is inapplicable as it involved an action against a foreign corporation for a tort committed by it in the state of North Carolina.

In the light most favorable to the plaintiff, the facts here are no stronger than were the facts in the Putnam case, supra.

The defendant made and sold beer in New Jersey, delivered F.O.B., New Jersey, to authorized distributors in North Carolina who at their own risk and expense, sold same to merchants and retail dealers. This constituted inter-state commerce and did not subject the defendant to substituted service and to the jurisdiction of the courts in North Carolina.


Summaries of

Walker v. P. Ballantine Sons

United States District Court, M.D. North Carolina
Mar 22, 1957
149 F. Supp. 379 (M.D.N.C. 1957)
Case details for

Walker v. P. Ballantine Sons

Case Details

Full title:Perry N. WALKER, Trustee for Greensboro Distributing Co., Inc., Bankrupt…

Court:United States District Court, M.D. North Carolina

Date published: Mar 22, 1957

Citations

149 F. Supp. 379 (M.D.N.C. 1957)

Citing Cases

Edwards v. Scott Fetzer, Inc.

The service of process can not be valid on the theory that the defendants were doing business in this state.…