situated, or has its principal office or place of business, or in which any of the principal officers may reside or may be summoned; but if such corporation be an insurance company, the action may be brought in the county wherein the cause of action, or some part thereof, arose.19

Sec. 23. Venue-Actions against transportation or transmission companies-Turnpike road companies.

Actions may be commenced against any transportation or transmission corporation or company, in the county where any persons reside upon whom service of summons is authorized to be made, irrespective of the order in which such persons are named in this act, and irrespective of the resi

dence of any superior officer or authorized person upon whom service of summons may be had; or, in the county where the cause of action, or some part thereof, may have accrued; or, in case of a transportation or transmission company, in any county through which or into which, the lines. of road or any part of the structure, or any transportation or transmission company may be, or passes; and the plaintiff may elect in which county he will bring any action.

An action other than one of those mentioned in the first three sections of this chapter (Snyder, 5580, 5581, 5582, Wilson, 4246, 4247, 4248), against a turnpike road company may be brought in any county in which any part of such road, or roads lie.20

Sec. 24. Venue-Where domestic charter provides place for suit.

The provisions of that chapter do not apply in case of any corporation created by the laws of this State, whose charter prescribes the place where alone a suit against such corporation may be brought.21

Sec. 25. Venue-The action against a nonresident or foreign corporation.

In addition to the other counties in which an action may be brought against a nonresident of this State, or foreign corporation, such action may be brought in any county in which there may be property of, or debts owing to such defendant, or where such defendant may be found; if such defendant be a foreign insurance company, the action may be brought in any county where such cause of action, or any

20 Snyder, 5,584 and 5,585; Act of April 28, 1908. The last paragraph of the above section applicable to turnpike road companies, is exactly identical with Ohio Gen. Code, Sec. 11,274 (1910).

21 Snyder, 5,586; Wilson, 4,252; Ohio Gen. Code, Sec. 11,275 (1910), identical; Portage v. Stukey, 18 Ohio, 455; Portage v. Western, 6 O. S. 599; Knox v. Bowersox, 6 C. C. (Ohio), 275.

part thereof, arose, or where the plaintiff resides, or where such company has an agent.22

The Supreme Court of Ohio, under an identical statute, in considering this provision, said:

"Power to hear and determine a controversy is jurisdiction, and it is complete when both the subject-matter of the controversy and the parties to it are properly before the court. In determining whether a given subject-matter is within the jurisdiction of a court, regard to the parties is not involved. The subject-matter of the original action was a contract alleged to have been broken by defendant. There is no question but that the court of common pleas had jurisdiction of this subject-matter, without regard to the place where the contract was made, or where it was violated. The point made by the defendant is, that the court, upon the facts stated in the petition had no power to issue its process against the defendant, or, even after voluntary appearance, to proceed to render judgment against it, on the cause of action stated in the petition. The general jurisdiction of the court of common pleas, over the persons of litigants, is not confined to residents or natural persons; nonresidents of the State and foreign corporations are as much subject to its jurisdiction as are residents and domestic corporations. Except in cases of a local nature, our courts are open to all who may seek relief therein, against anyone who can be reached by its process. We know of no principle that will exempt a foreign corporation that voluntarily comes into this State, from liability to answer any complaint which may be preferred against it in the courts of the State that would not exonerate natural persons under like circumstances

The general principle declared in this provision of the statute has no reference to actions upon causes arising in this State, no matter where the cause arose, if the subject

22 Snyder, 5,587; Act of April 28, 1908; Kansas, 4,483 (1901), iden

tical; Ohio Gen. Code, Sec. 11,276 (1910), identical.

matter be within the jurisdiction of the court. Nor is the rule confined to corporations other than insurance companies. Any foreign corporation which may be found in this State, may be sued in any county in this State, in any court, having jurisdiction of the subject-matter of the suit.23

An action brought to enforce a statutory liability of the stockholders in a corporation is not "rightly brought" in this county under favor of the statutes, when none of the defendants reside, or could be, or were summoned here.25

24

The provisions of the statute under consideration 26 provide that an action may be brought against a nonresident of the State in any county in which he may have property or debts owing to him, or where he may be found. If such nonresident cannot be found and served personally, the court cannot obtain jurisdiction unless the action be one in which constructive service may be had on the defendant. Where in

such action the scope and purpose of it is the recovery of a money judgment, and enforce its collection by writ of execution under the statute,27 the statute does not authorize a personal service out of the State on such nonresident.28

An action begun by a receiver appointed by the court, to wind up the affairs of a corporation, and to collect an unpaid subscription, is a suit at law, and not properly brought for the resident receiver to join in one action all the delinquent stockholders as defendants, residents as well as nonresidents of the county. The service of summons on nonresidents of the county in such action will be set aside.29

23 Handy v. Ins. Co., 37 0. S. 370. At the time this action was begun the statute contained this additional provision: "But if such defendant be a foreign insurance company, the action may be brought in any county where the cause or some part thereof, arose." The common pleas court mentioned in the opinion of the court, set forth

above, is the same as the district court of the State of Oklahoma.

24 Ohio Gen. Code, Secs. 11,276 and 11,282.

25 Lamont W. L. B. 413.

v. Holmes, etc., 10

26 Ohio Gen. Code, Sec. 11276. 27 Ohio Gen. Code, Sec. 11,282. 28 Williams v. Wilson, 28 O. S. 451.

29 Smith v. Johnson, 57 O. S. 486.

Sec. 26. Venue-Where every other action must be brought. Every other action must be brought in the county in which the defendant, or some one of the defendants reside or may be summoned.30

Where an action is brought and summons is issued to the sheriff of another county, and is there served upon the defendant, and judgment in such case is rendered upon default without any appearance of the defendant, the judgment is void, the court having no jurisdiction of the person of the defendant.31

As has been shown elsewhere in this work, an action cannot be brought outside of the county where the defendant resides, or may be summoned, by merely uniting with him as codefendant, some imaginary party, against whom no judgment could be properly rendered.33

30 Snyder, 5,589; Act of April 28, 1908; Kansas, 4,485 (1901), identical; Nebraska, 1,059 (1907), identical; Ohio Gen. Code, Sec. 11277 (1910), identical, but has attached this exception: "Except actions against an executor, administrator, guardian, or trustee, which may be brought in the county wherein he was appointed or resides, in which cases summons may issue to any county." Since the plaintiff sought the jurisdiction of the court below, and since the counterclaim of the defendant arose out of the transaction set forth in the petition, and is connected with the subject-matter of the action, the counterclaim is properly filed in the cause, and jurisdiction is obtained by the court as against the defendant; and, in such a case, the provisions of the code of civil procedure which declares that "every other action must be brought in the county in which the defendant, or some one of the defendants reside or may be

summoned," is waived by the plaintiff and does not apply here. Wyman v. Herrard, 9 Okla. 35, 59 Pac. 1,009.

31 Foster v. Cimarron, 14 Okla. 24, 76 Pac. 145; Walker V. Stevens, 72 N. W. (Neb.) 1,038. Where one of two joint makers residing in the county is sued in the county where one resides, and not in the other, and orders of attachment issue to the other county, they will be dissolved when no attachment is made in the county where suit is brought, in so far as it applies to the maker residing in the other county. Ruleman V. Hulze, 32 Kan. 598, 5 Pac. 176. A civil action for an assault and battery may generally be commenced in any county in which the defendant may be summoned. McAnarney v. Caughenaur, 34 Kan. 621, 9 Pac. 476.

33 Brenner v. Eggly, 23 Kan. 123.