Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Mieyr v. Federal Surety Co. of Davenport

Montana Supreme Court

Decided April 1, 1933No. 7,074Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Angstman

The majority opinion concedes that the Iowa decree worked a present dissolution of the surety company. With this I agree, and shall discuss the remaining questions on that basis.

The majority opinion, so far as it holds that whether an action may be commenced or continued against a foreign cor poration after its dissolution by decree of tbe court of its domicile depends upon the laws of the state in which the action is pending, is in my opinion erroneous. I realize that there is dictum in some cases sustaining that view, and that a few eases so hold. The overwhelming weight of authority and…

2Cases cited37 opinions

  1. Reynolds v. StocktonSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
  2. Riehle v. MargoliesSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
  3. Oklahoma Natural Gas Co. v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
  4. National Bank v. ColbySupreme Court of the United States · 1875
  5. Pendleton v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1892

32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API