Atkinson v. Asheville Street Railway Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Civil action, by Natt Atkinson against the Asheville Street Railway Company, to set aside a certain assignment of a franchise and to restrain defendant company from operating under such franchise, heard before Bynum, J, at August Term, 1892, of BüNCOmbe Superior Court. From a judgment dismissing the action on the ground that the complaint did not state facls sufficient to constitute a cause of action, the defendant appealed.
Read the full summary
Civil action, by Natt Atkinson against the Asheville Street Railway Company, to set aside a certain assignment of a franchise and to restrain defendant company from operating under such franchise, heard before Bynum, J, at August Term, 1892, of BüNCOmbe Superior Court. From a judgment dismissing the action on the ground that the complaint did not state facls sufficient to constitute a cause of action, the defendant appealed. The complaint was as follows: 1. That the city of Asheville is a body politic and corporate, duly chartered and organized under and by virtue of an act of the General…
1Opinion of the Court
Clark, J.:
The so-called “Farinholt” charter is simply a license by the city to lay down a railway track on certain streets mentioned, granted to individuals named, who, of course, could act as a corporation only upon duly taking out letters of incorporation before the Clerk or obtaining a charter from the General Assembly. The question whether such incorporation has been duly obtained, or whether those parties have attempted to exercise corporate functions without it, is not raised in this action, and could not be in this collateral waj.
*587The city authorities were empowered to issue the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Railroad Co. v. RichmondSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Walker v. . ScottSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
- Sondley v. City of AshevilleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893
- State v. . PriceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1892
- Spence Ross v. . TapscottSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1885
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Michigan Telephone Co. v. City of St. JosephMichigan Supreme Court · 1899
- Barden v. Stickney.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1902
- Delozier v. . BirdSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1898
- Simmons v. . AllisonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1896