Ky. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 271

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 271.385

Repealed, 1972

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KY-LRCapps.legislature.ky.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Catchline at repeal: Registered office and process agent. History: Repealed 1972 Ky. Acts ch. 274, sec. 165, effective July 1, 1972. -- Amended 1970 Ky. Acts ch. 284, sec. 1, effective June 18, 1970. -- Amended 1958 Ky. Acts ch. 51, sec. 2. -- Created 1946 Ky. Acts ch. 141, sec. 1, effective July 1, 1946.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases, 1947–1975 · leading case: Harold Noel Arrowsmith, Jr. v. United Press International
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Harold Noel Arrowsmith, Jr. v. United Press International (1963) ca2 “2d 242 , is in no way inconsistent with the above decisions, as my brothers seem to imply,, for not only did the action come to the federal courts by removal, but in addition it involved service upon the secretary of state pursuant to Ky.Rev.Stat. §§ 271.385 and 271.610. Thus it…”
Post v. American Cleaning Equipment Corporation (1969) kyctapphigh · cites it 2× “610(2), which statute was in effect at the time of the accident and is in this language: "Any foreign corporation that does business in this state without having complied with the provisions of KRS 271.”
Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Nantz (1974) kyctapp · cites it 3× “The credit company (which as herein-above mentioned is a foreign corporation) carried on regular business in Kentucky and by reason thereof had designated a process agent, in conformity with KRS 271.385, who was located in Jefferson County, Kentucky, and upon whom process…”
Gearhart v. WSAZ, Inc. (1957) kyed “Where this statute is not complied with, a foreign corporation so doing business is deemed to have made the Secretary of State its agent for the service of process in any civil action instituted in the courts of this state against such corporation involving a cause of action…”
Commonwealth ex rel. Breckinridge v. Monroe Co. (1964) kyctapp · cites it 2× “-055(3) and KRS 271.385(2) ; reiterated the allegations made in the original complaint; and further alleged that, having done business in this state while prohibited from so doing, the Monroe Company, and each of its officers, “are subject to the penalties provided for in KRS…”
Star Elkhorn Coal Co. v. Red Ash Pocahontas Coal Co. (1951) kyed “This statute is comprehensive and meant to cover both those who have and those who have not complied with KRS 271.385. The motion to quash the summons should be overruled.”
Bowen v. Eastside Jersey Dairy (1975) kyctapp “610(2) authorizes service of process on a foreign corporation that does business in this state without designating a process agent as required by KRS 271.385. It provides that by so doing business in this state the corporation shall be deemed to have made the Secretary of State…”
Kentucky Straight Creek Coal Co. v. Commonwealth (1947) kyctapphigh “055(3), and in the second a violation of KRS 271.385(2) is alleged. In each action it was alleged that the corporation is engaged in the production of bituminous coal in Bell County, Kentucky, and that William E.”
Etheridge v. Grove Manufacturing Co. (1968) kywd · cites it 5× “610(2) Kentucky Revised Statutes, which is as follows: “(2) Any foreign corporation that does business in this state without having complied with the provisions of KRS 271.385 as to designation of process agent shall, by such doing of business, be deemed to have made the…”
Tufts v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. (1966) kyctapp “Appellee is a foreign corporation, and in compliance with KRS 271.385 it had designated Ash-land as the location of its resident office and named a process agent there.”
Michigan Wisconsin Pipeline Co. v. Commonwealth (1971) kyctapp “KRS 271.385(2) requires that every foreign corporation “carrying on business in this state” shall at all times have an office in this state and an authorized agent in this state upon whom process can be served.”
Irby v. All State Industries (1969) kywd “610(2) that: “Any foreign corporation that does business in this state without having complied with the provisions of KRS 271.385 as to designation of process agent shall, by such doing of business, be deemed to have made the Secretary of State its agent for the service of…”
Show all 14 citing cases →
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 271.385(2) — 4 cases
Commonwealth ex rel. Breckinridge v. Monroe Co. (1964) kyctapp “-055(3) and KRS 271.385(2) ; reiterated the allegations made in the original complaint; and further alleged that, having done business in this state while prohibited from so doing, the Monroe Company, and each of its officers, “are subject to the penalties provided for in KRS…”
Kentucky Straight Creek Coal Co. v. Commonwealth (1947) kyctapphigh “055(3), and in the second a violation of KRS 271.385(2) is alleged. In each action it was alleged that the corporation is engaged in the production of bituminous coal in Bell County, Kentucky, and that William E.”
Etheridge v. Grove Manufacturing Co. (1968) kywd “610(2) Kentucky Revised Statutes, which is as follows: “(2) Any foreign corporation that does business in this state without having complied with the provisions of KRS 271.385 as to designation of process agent shall, by such doing of business, be deemed to have made the…”
Michigan Wisconsin Pipeline Co. v. Commonwealth (1971) kyctapp “KRS 271.385(2) requires that every foreign corporation “carrying on business in this state” shall at all times have an office in this state and an authorized agent in this state upon whom process can be served.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.