Humphreys v. Mooney
Supreme Court of Colorado
Appeal from District Coxtrt of Arapahoe County. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion. The plaintiff below bad judgment.
1Opinion of the CourtStone, J.
The first question presented in this case, is whether the appellee, the plaintiff in the court below, could question the validity of the corporation, in a suit upon a contract he had made with it.
A few cases may be found in which, under the given facts, the legal existence of a corporation has been allowed to be questioned in a collateral proceeding; but as a general rule it seems quite well settled that the validity of the existence of a corporation cannot be questioned collaterally.
Several distinctions, however, have been made in the cases covered by both the general rule and the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Heaston v. Cincinnati & Fort Wayne RailroadIndiana Supreme Court · 1861
- Abbott v. Omaha Smelting & Refining Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1876
- Jones v. Cincinnati Type Foundry Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1860
- Mokelumne Hill Canal & Mining Co. v. WoodburyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1859
- Whipple v. ParkerMichigan Supreme Court · 1874
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Randle v. Winona Coal Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1921
- Mitchell v. JensenUtah Supreme Court · 1905
- Wright v. LeeSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1893
- Spokane & Idaho Lumber Co. v. LoyWashington Supreme Court · 1899
- Swofford Bros. Dry Goods Co. v. OwenSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.