ST. MARY'S FRANCO-AMERICAN PETROLEUM COMPANY
v.
WEST VIRGINIA

U.S. | 1906-12-03
No. 98
203 U.S. 183 Supreme Court of the United States (1906) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 51 L. Ed. 144 · 27 S. Ct. 132 · SCDB 1906-018 · 1906 U.S. LEXIS 1581
Cited by 6 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

West Virginia enacted a law in 1905 requiring foreign corporations and non-resident domestic corporations to appoint the state auditor as their agent for service of process and pay a ten-dollar fee, replacing the prior system of corporate-appointed attorneys. The Supreme Court upheld the law against Fourteenth Amendment challenges, finding that the state had a clear right to regulate corporations it chartered and permitted to do business within its borders, that the classification of corporations subject to the requirement was reasonable, and that the fee did not constitute an unjust taking of property.

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Opinion of the Court
Mr. Chief Justice Fuller,

Mr. Chief Justice Fuller,

after making the foregoing statement, delivered the opinion of-the court.

It is argued that the act of February 22, 1905, is invalid under the Fourteenth Amendment, in that it deprives the company of liberty of contract and property without.due process of law, and denies it the equal protection of the laws. But in view of repeated decisions of this court, the contention is without merit. The State had the clear right to regulate its own creations, and, a fortiori, foreign corporations permitted to transact business within its borders.

In this instance'it'put all non-resident domestic corporations, which elected to have their places of business and works out-side of-the State, and all foreign corporations coming into the State, on the same footing in respect of the service of process, and the law operated on all these alike.'

Such a classification was reasonable and not open to constitutional objection. Orient Insurance Company v. Dagys, 172 U. S. 557, 563; Waters-Pierce Oil Company v. Texas, 177 U. S. 43; Central Loan and Trust Company v. Campbell, 173 U. S. 84; National Council v. State Council, decided November 19, 1906, ante, p. 151; Northwestern Life Insurance Company v. Riggs, post, p. 243; Brannon on Fourteenth Amendment, Chap. 16.

It is true that the prior law left it to the corporation to appoint an attorney to represent it, and that the act of February, 1905, changed-this so as to make the auditor such attorney, but this at the most was no more than an amendment as to the appointment of an agent, and when the St. Mary’s Company accepted its charter-it did so. subject to the right of amendment. And we-agree with.-, the state court that the requirement of the payment .of ten dollars to the auditor for the use of the State does not amount to a taking of property without due process or an unjust discrimination. Charlotte Railroad v. Gibbs, 142 U. S. 386; People v. Squire, 145 U. S. 175. If the act is valid,, that is.

The objections going to the'expediency or the hardships and injustice of the act, and its alleged inconsistency with the state constitution and laws, are matters with which we have nothing to do on this writ of error, and the question whether, the provision that the corporation shall hot be required to pay any fee to any 'one theretofore appointed an attorney is invalid or not, requires no consideration on this record.

Judgment affirmed.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Mass. Bonding & Ins. Co. v. Concrete Steel Bridge Co., 37 F.2d 695 (4th Cir. 1930)
    …porations doing business within the state, constituting the auditor of the state the attorney in fact, with authority to accept service of process, has been upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States. St. Mary’s Petroleum Co. v. West Virginia, 203 U. S. 183, 27 S. Ct. 132, 51 L. Ed. 144. The construction and effect given by the state court to a state statute of this character, or to a power of attorney executed pursuant thereto, will be followed by federal courts sitting within that jurisdiction. Penn…
    1 / 2
  • Hwy. Steel & Mfg. Co. v. Crawford Cnty. Cir. Court, 308 U.S. 504 (U.S. 1939)
    …Per Curiam: The appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. Hess v. Pawloski, 274 U. S. 352; St. Mary’s Petroleum Co. v. West Virginia, 203 U. S. 183, 191-192; Bain Peanut Co. v. Pinson, 282 U. S. 499.…

Authorities Cited (24 total)

View all 24 cited authorities →

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw