Mower v. Staples
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Plaintiff, who is a large stockholder of the Saint Croix Boom Corporation, brought this action in the district court for Washington county, to restrain the defendants, who are stockholders in the same company, from passing any resolution, or doing any other act or thing, signifying the acceptance by the corporation of the amendment to its charter contained in Sp.
Read the full summary
Plaintiff, who is a large stockholder of the Saint Croix Boom Corporation, brought this action in the district court for Washington county, to restrain the defendants, who are stockholders in the same company, from passing any resolution, or doing any other act or thing, signifying the acceptance by the corporation of the amendment to its charter contained in Sp. Laws 1883, c. 87, § 1, and to restrain them from increasing the number of directors of the company from five to nine in accordance with the amendment. Plaintiff appeals, from an order by McCluer, J., dissolving a temporary…
1Opinion of the Court
Berry, J.1
By Sp. Laws 1876, c. 230, § 3, it is provided that the board of directors of the St. Croix Boom Corporation shall consist of five members. The section was amended by Sp. Laws 1883, c. 87, § 1, so as to provide that the board of directors shall consist of nine members.
The charter of a private corporation being a contract between the-state and the corporators, and between the corporators themselves, (Morawetz, Priv. Corp. §§ 149, 198,) and therefore constitutionally-protected from impairment against the will of the corporators, it is not questioned that, to become binding and…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Clearwater v. MeredithSupreme Court of the United States · 1864
- Nugent v. the SupervisorsSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
- Stevens v. Rutland & Burlington RailroadSupreme Court of Vermont · 1851
- Winter v. Muscogee RailroadSupreme Court of Georgia · 1852
- Banet v. Alton & Sangamon RailroadIllinois Supreme Court · 1851
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Randle v. Winona Coal Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1921
- Perkins v. CoffinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1911
- Toledo Traction, Light & Power Co. v. SmithDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1913
- G. William Filley and Carole S. Filley v. Kickoff Publishing Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1972
- Johnson v. Tribune-Herald Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1923
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.