From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Leach Co. v. Superior Court

Court of Appeal of California, First District, Division Four
Oct 14, 1968
266 Cal.App.2d 493 (Cal. Ct. App. 1968)

Opinion

Docket No. 25589.

October 14, 1968.

PROCEEDING to quash service of summons in an action for personal injuries. Peremptory writ granted.

Ropers, Majeski Phelps for Petitioner.

No appearance for Respondent.

Scher Fernandez and Bruce Cornblum for Real Parties in Interest.


Petitioner is defendant in an action brought by Kim Godfrey for personal injuries sustained when a garbage container manufactured by petitioner toppled over. [1] After service of process upon petitioner as a foreign corporation doing business within this state, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 411, subdivision 2, petitioner moved to quash service of summons upon a showing that petitioner maintained no office, agents or employees in California, solicited no sales and conducted no other activities within the state, and sold products manufactured in Wisconsin through an independent firm operating in New York City.

There may well be no constitutional inhibition against the California court taking jurisdiction in these circumstances. (See McGee v. International Life Ins. Co. (1957) 355 U.S. 220 [2 L.Ed.2d 223, 78 S.Ct. 199]; Metal-Matic, Inc. v. District Court (1966) 82 Nev. 263 [ 415 P.2d 617]; Gray v. American Radiator Standard Sanitary Corp. (1961) 22 Ill.2d 432 [ 176 N.E.2d 761].) However, within constitutional limits the power of the California court to take jurisdiction is defined by statute. Code of Civil Procedure, section 411, subdivision 2, provides for substituted service upon a foreign corporation only when the corporation is "doing business in this state." Here the only competent evidence before the court indicated that petitioner neither sold goods nor carried out any other business activity in California. The mere presence in the state of the equipment manufactured by petitioner is insufficient under the statute to confer jurisdiction. ( Da Silveira v. Westphalia Separator Co. (1967) 248 Cal.App.2d 789 [ 57 Cal.Rptr. 62]; Twinco Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1964) 230 Cal.App.2d 321 [ 40 Cal.Rptr. 833].)

A peremptory writ will issue as prayed.

Devine, P.J., and Rattigan, J., concurred.


Summaries of

Leach Co. v. Superior Court

Court of Appeal of California, First District, Division Four
Oct 14, 1968
266 Cal.App.2d 493 (Cal. Ct. App. 1968)
Case details for

Leach Co. v. Superior Court

Case Details

Full title:LEACH COMPANY, Petitioner v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY…

Court:Court of Appeal of California, First District, Division Four

Date published: Oct 14, 1968

Citations

266 Cal.App.2d 493 (Cal. Ct. App. 1968)
72 Cal. Rptr. 216

Citing Cases

A.R. Industries, Inc. v. Superior Court

The court also states that unless jurisdictional concepts are applied in recognition of technological and…

Deere & Co. v. Superior Court

The affidavit merely shows presence of equipment manufactured by the defendant, which is insufficient to…