DOING BUSINESS

Definition of DOING BUSINESS in Black's Law Dictionary 4th Edition – Legal dictionary – Glossary of legal terms.

Definition of DOING BUSINESS

Within statutes on service of process on foreign corporations, equivalent to conducting or managing business. Wichita Film g z Supply Co. v. Yale, 194 Mo. App. 60, 184 S.W. 119. A foreign corporation is "doing business", making it amenable to process within state, if it does business therein in such a manner as to warrant the inference that it is present there. Cannon Mfg. Co. v. Cudahy Packing Co., D.C.N.C., 292 F. 169, 171. Or that it has subjected itself to the jurisdiction and laws in which the service is made. W. J. Armstrong Co. v. New York Cent. & H. R. R. Co., 129 Minn. 104, 151 N.W. 917, 919, L.R.A.1916E, 232, Ann.Cas.1916E, 335; The doing of business is the exercise in the state of some of the ordinary functions for which the corporation was organized. Davis & Worrell v. General Motors Acceptance Corporation, 153 Ark. 626, 241 S.W. 44, 46. What constitutes "doing business" depends on the facts in each particular case. Walton N. Moore Dry Goods Co. v. Commercial Industrial Co., C.C.A.,Cal., 282 F. 21, 25. The activities of the corporation, however, must represent a more or less continuous effort; Knapp v. Bullock Tractor Co., D.C.Cal., 242 F. 543, 550; Johnson v. Cass & Emerson, 91 Vt. 103, 99 A. 633, 635; or be of a systematic and regular nature; Home Lumber Co. v. Hopkins, 107 Kan. 153, 190 P. 601, 605, 10 A.L.R. 879.

The transaction of single piece of business is not enough. Wood & Selick v. American Grocery Co., 96 N.J.Law, 218, 114 A. 756, 757; Anderson v. Morris & E. R. Co., C.C.A.N.Y., 216 F. 83, 87. To the contrary. Tripp State Bank of Tripp v. Jerke, 45 S.D. 448, 188 N.W. 314, 315.

No general definition can be made of phrase "doing business" in statutes relating to foreign corporations. Each case must be determined on its own facts, by considering objective of statute in which phrase is found, its purpose and orientation to the carrying on of business, nature of activities, their magnitude, multiplicity of contracts, and possibility that incidents may occur, and liabilities be created, especially where entrance into state is in ordinary prosecution of corporation's business. State Highway and Public Works Commission v. Diamond S. S. Transp. Corp., 225 N. C. 198, 34 S.E.2d 78, 80, 81.

Ordinarily the phrase means engaging in activities in pursuit of gain. Welch Holding Co. v. Galloway, 161 Or. 515, 89 P.2d 559; People v. Jones, 16 N.Y.S.2d 558, 559, 172 Misc. 368.

The following transactions and businesses illustrate, what constitutes or does not constitute "doing business": advertising, Society Milton Athena v. National Bank of Greece, 1 N.Y.S.2d 155, 2 N.Y.S.2d 155; Deighan v. Beverage Retailer Weekly & Trade Newspaper Corporation, 18 N.J.Misc. 705, 16 A.2d 612, 613; bringing of actions, R. L. Witters Associates v. Ebsary Gypsum Co., D.C.Fla., 19 F. Supp. 646, 648; Schneider v. Greater M. & S. Circuit, 259 N.Y.S. 319, 144 Misc. 534; broadcasting system, Hoffman v. Carter, 118 N.J.L. 379, 192 A. 825; State ex rel. Columbia Broadcasting Co. v. Superior Court for King County, 1 Wash.2d 379, 96 P.2d 248, 250; consignment, Oyler v. J. P. Seeburg Corporation, D.C.Tex., 29 F.Supp. 927; Thew Shovel Co. v. Superior Court in and for City and County of San Francisco, 35 Cal.App.2d 183, 95 P.2d 149, 151, 152; holding companies, Wilhelm v. Consolidated Oil Corporation, D.C.Okl., 11 F.Supp. 444, 447; Cliffs Corporation v. Evatt, 138 Ohio St. 336, 35 N.E.2d 144, 151; insurance, Sasnett v. Iowa State Traveling Men's Ass'n, C.C.A.Iowa, 90 F.2d 514; Hoopeston Canning Co. v. Pink, 288 N.Y. 291, 43 N.E.2d 49, 53; newspapers, Layne v. Tribune Co., 71 F.2d 223, 224, 63 App.D.C. 213; Neely v. Philadelphia Inquirer Co., 62 F.2d 873, 874, 61 App.D.C. 334; railroads, Klabzuba v. Southern Pac. Co., D.C.Wash., 33 F.2d 359, 360; Gadboury v. Central Vermont Ry. Co., 231 N.Y.S. 630, 632, 225 App.Div. 145; solicitation, Mandel Bros. v. Henry A. O'Neil, Inc., C.C.A.S.D., 69 F.2d 452, 455; Bank v. Charles Meyers & Co., 182 Md. 556, 35 A.2d 110, 113.

Illustrations of what constitutes "doing business" within various taxing statutes follow: Capital stock tax, Goodyear Inv. Corporation v. Campbell, C.C.A.Ohio, 139 F.2d 188, 190, 191: Refrigeration Discount Corporation v. Metzger, D.C.Pa., 10 F.Supp. 748, 749; excise tax, Harmar Coal. Co. v. Heiner, D.C.Pa., 26 F.2d 729, 730; Queens Run Refractories Co. v. Commonwealth, 270 Mass. 19, 169 N.E. 515, 516; franchise tax, Stone v. Interstate Natural Gas Co., C.C.A.Miss., 103 F.2d 544, 548; Cliffs Corporation v. Evatt, 138 Ohio St. 336, 35 N.E.2d 144, 151; income tax, Blair v. Wilson Syndicate Trust, C.C.A., 39 F.2d 43, 45; Welch Holding Co. v. Galloway, 161 Or. 515, 89 P.2d 559, 564.

---
That's the definition of DOING BUSINESS in Black's Law Dictionary 4th Edition – Legal dictionary – Glossary of legal terms. Courtesy of Cekhukum.com.