Moorman Manufacturing Co. v. Haack
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Murray county to recover $75. The case was tried before Nelson, J., who when plaintiff rested granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the action because of plaintiff’s failure to prove that plaintiff was a corporation existing by virtue of the laws of Illinois. From the judgment entered pursuant to the order for judgment, plaintiff appealed.
1Opinion of the Court
Dibell, C.
Action to recover for merchandise sold and delivered. The action was *127dismissed at the close of the plaintiff’s testimony and judgment was entered. The defendant appeals from the judgment.
The complaint alleges that the defendant is an Illinois corporation. The defendant specifically denies it. There was no proof of incorpo-. ration. The sale and delivery of the merchandise is conceded. The action was dismissed because of lack of proof of thg incorporation of the plaintiff. The fact of corporate existence was not a material issue. It was not necessary to prove it. Finch, Van Slyck &…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Holden v. Great Western Elevator Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1897
- Finch, Van Slyck & McConville v. Le Sueur County Co-operative Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
3Cited by1 opinion
- Licensed Retail Liquor Dealers Ass'n v. DentonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1919