Hutchinson v. Western & Atlantic Railroad
Tennessee Supreme Court
PROM HAMILTON. Appeal from the judgment of tne Circuit Court, July Term, 1871. J. B. Hoyl, J. The Western & Atlantic Railroad Company, of which the State of Georgia was the sole owner and stockholder, was • by its charter authorized to construct and operate a line of railroad from Atlanta, Georgia, to Chattanooga, Tennessee. Without any authority in its charter it undertook to run in connection with its road' a line of steamers on the Tennessee river.
Read the full summary
PROM HAMILTON. Appeal from the judgment of tne Circuit Court, July Term, 1871. J. B. Hoyl, J. The Western & Atlantic Railroad Company, of which the State of Georgia was the sole owner and stockholder, was • by its charter authorized to construct and operate a line of railroad from Atlanta, Georgia, to Chattanooga, Tennessee. Without any authority in its charter it undertook to run in connection with its road' a line of steamers on the Tennessee river. Two of these steamers collided in port at Chattanooga, and the husband of the plaintiff, who was mate upon one of them, was wounded and…
1Opinion of the CourtTurNey, J.
The doctrine “ultra vires” is not aplicable in this case.
In arriving at a true solution of the question involved, the only use to be made of the charter granted by Georgia and Tennessee to Western & Atlantic Railroad, is to show the fact that it had a corporate existence.
If a corporation, chartered for one purpose, engage *636in a business different from that authorized by charter, or if its employees engage in such different business in the name of the principal, and the principal, with a knowledge of such departure, receive the profits arising therefrom, employ agents to superintend it, or in…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Nims v. Mount Hermon Boys' SchoolMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1893
- Brow v. Boston & Albany RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892