it within the state, thereby became entitled to the same right to transact business in the state as a domestic corporation, and to all the privileges, immunities, and rights of action given to á domestic corporation.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Corporations, Cent. Dig. §§ 2551, 2556; Dec. Dig. <@=>654.]
2. Corporations <@=>661(1)—Foreign Corporations—Action—Limitations.
Such corporation was also entitled to plead the statute of limitations as if it were a domestic corporation.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Corporations, Cent. Dig. §§ 2563, 2565-2567; Dec. Dig. <@=>661(1).]
3. Corporations <@=>668(8)—Foreign Corporations—Process.
A foreign corporation, authorized to do business in the state, whose president and assistant secretary and treasurer, both competent to transact its business within the state and whose freight and passenger agent resided in the state, and which kept a bank account in the state, and whose only proof that it was not doing business in the state was an affidavit of a vice president and general manager residing in the state of Texas, having a limited knowledge of its affairs within the state, and whose designated agent to receive service of process could not be found, might be served by service on any officer within the state competent to-transact its business.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Corporations, Cent. Dig. § 2614; Dec. Dig. <@=>668(8).]
<@=For other cases see same topic & KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests & Indexes
Appeal from Special Term, New York County.
Action by James J. E. Burke against the Galveston, Houston & Henderson Railroad Company. From an order denying defendant’s motion to set aside the service of a summons, it appeals. Order" affirmed.
Argued before CLARKE, P. J., and SCOTT, DOWLING, SMITH, and PAGE, JJ.Stuart T. B. Morison, of New York City, for appellant.
Arthur W. Clement, of New York City, for respondent.
[1, 2] The defendant, a foreign corporation, in 1893 applied for and received from the secretary of state a certificate of authority to do business in this state. By virtue of that certificate it was exempted from the statute whereby a foreign corporation was-prohibited from maintaining an action in this state upon any contract made by it within the state. General Corporation Law, § 15 p Laws 1890, c. 563, as added by Laws 1892, c. 687. It thereby became entitled to the same right to transact business here as a domestic corporation had. Lancaster v. Amsterdam Imp. Co., 140 N. Y. 576 , 588, 35 N. E. 964 , 24 L. R. A. 322 . It also was entitled to plead the statute of limitations, as if it were a domestic corporation. Wehrenberg v. N. Y., N. H. & H. R. R. Co., 124 App. Div. 205 , 108 N. Y. Supp. 704 . Thus by applying for and receiving the certificate, evidencing its intention to subject itself to the jurisdiction and laws of this state, it had extended to it all the privileges, immunities, and rights of action that were given to a domestic corporation.
[3] This certificate has never been revoked and is still in full force and effect. This corporation has residing here its president