Dalton Adding Mach Company v. Virginia State Corporation Commission/Opinion of the Court
Plaintiff in error, an Ohio corporation, complains that the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia improperly affirmed an order by the Corporation Commission assessing a fine against it for transacting business in the state without certificate of authority required by law. 118 Va. 563, 88 S. E. 167. That court adopted and approved the Commission's opinion, which, among other things, declared:

'We are of the opinion that the facts of this case      demonstrate beyond a peradventure that the Dalton Adding      Machine Company is doing a substantial part of its business      in this state in the following particulars:

'(a) In bringing its machines into this state before selling      them, and in maintaining a stock of machines for exhibition      and trial, and in selling such machines in this state, after      their transportation in interstate commerce has been      concluded and they have become mingled with the general mass      of property in this state;

'(b) In renting such machines and collecting rents therefor      from its customers in this state at will;

'(c) In buying and exchanging machines for machines made by      other manufacturers, and in selling such machines so received      in exchange at will;

'(d) In employing a mechanic in this state and entering into      contracts for repairing of machines owned by persons in this      state from time to time and collecting the charges therefor;

'(e) In keeping on hand in this  tate certain parts of      machines and a stock of paper and ribbons suitable for use      upon the machines, which are freely sold from time to time by      its agent in Richmond to its customers.

'We think it perfectly apparent that in these particulars the      business of the company in this state is not 'commerce among      the states,' the freedom of which is guaranteed by the United States Constitution, but that such      business, in every essential particular, is business which      has been transacted by the company in this state in violation      of the statutes referred to.'

Beyond serious doubt the above specifications concerning the business carried on in Virginia are supported by the record. A material part of it was intrastate.

Affirmed. 

Notes