Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1909-04-07
AMENABLE TO LOCAL COURTS
DECISION AFFECTING FOREIGN
CORPORATIONS.
Court of Appeals Ruling in West
Virginia Coal and Coke Rail-
way Case.

The Court of Appeals In its decision in
the case of the Ferguson Contracting
Company agt. the Coal and Coke Railway
Company, has annouced the important
doctrine that in order to make foreign
corporation amenable to service of pro-
cess in the local courts it is not necessary
that IT be conducting in the District any
of its main industrial enterprises. but
hat it is sufficient if it is doing or trans
acting any business, even though con-
fined 10 the carrying out Of its merely in
cidental powers as distinguished from its
principal business.
The Ferguson company. New York
corporation, brought suit in the Supreme
Court Of the District against the Coal and
Coke Railway Company, West Virginia
corporation, claiming something more
than $4,000 and interest on an award of
arbitrator.
The award grew out Of an agreement to
submit to arbitration disputes as to the
amount due to the Ferguson company
under contract for building the defend
ants railroad in West Virginia. and the
refusal OF the railway company to pay the
award.
Lawyers in the Case.
Former Senator Henry Gassaway Davis
of West Virginia is the president of the
railway company. Suit was filed by John
G.. Carlisle former Secretary of the
Treasury, and James S. Easby-Snith and
II. Ralph Burton of the local bar as coun-
sci for the Ferguson company.
The defendant, through its counsel, for
mer Senator Faulkner of West Virginia
and j. j. Darlington Of the local bar. filed
a motion to quaSh the service, which was
made by the marshal upon Arthur Lee.
treasurer of the railway company. on the
ground that the defendant was not trans
acting business in the District within the
meaning Of the statute providing for serv-
ice on foreign corporations.
1t was shown that the railway company
maintains permanent offices in the Dis
trict. which are open for at least half of
the year and occupied by the principal
officers of the company. but 1t was claim
ed that this was merely for the conven-
fence of the officers, and that the COM
pany carried on no part of its industrial
operations here 1t was also shown that
the arbitration agreement had been made
and partially carried out in the Wash
ington office.
Sustained by Lower Court.
The lower court. Justice Anderson sit
ting. sustained the motion. holding that
the acts done by the railway company did
not constitute the doing of business within
the meaning of the law.
The Ferguson company appealed to the
Court of Appeals, which. after reviewing
the facts and the law, reversed the order
of the lower court. and holds that it is
immaterial whether the Office in Wash
ington was maintained for the con-
venience of the officers-that their con-
venience was the convenience Of the cor
poration also. The court says: The sub
stantial transfer of the general corpara-
ton management and supervision to that
Uhe Washington office. though primarily
intended for the convenience of the man.
aging officers, was approved by the cor
poration, and it cannot escape the legal
consequences of it's acts"