Legal Opinion

Ohio & Mississippi Railroad v. McPherson

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided March 15, 1864PublishedCited by 21 opinions

Appeal from St, Louis Circuit Court. I. A corporation authorized to be constituted under an act of the Legislature cannot accept any agreement payable to it, or for its benefit, until the prerequisites have been performed to give it a corporate existence. (Wilm. & M. HR. v. Wright, 5 Jones, Law, 304.) II.

Read the full summary

Appeal from St, Louis Circuit Court. I. A corporation authorized to be constituted under an act of the Legislature cannot accept any agreement payable to it, or for its benefit, until the prerequisites have been performed to give it a corporate existence. (Wilm. & M. HR. v. Wright, 5 Jones, Law, 304.) II. All votes and proceedings of persons professing to act in the capacity of corporators, when assembled beyond the bounds of the State granting the charter of incorporation, are wholly void. (Ang. & Ames on Corp., § 498; Runyan v. Oostar’s Lesses, 14 Pet. 128; Miller v. Ewer, 27 Me. 509;…

1Opinion of the CourtDrtden, Judge

This suit was-commenced the 28th November, 1858, and was for the recovery of fourteen hundred dollars and interest, being a balance of the larger sum of two thousand dollars, subscribed by the appellant on the 28th of March, 1851, to the capital stock of the Ohio and Mississippi Railroad Company, the respondent. There seems to be no dispute about the facts in the case, but about the law arising upon them. The facts as disclosed by the record, so far as are material to tire questions arising, are as follows :

The plaintiff was incorporated by an act of the Legislature of the State of Illinois,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Chester Glass Co. v. DeweyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1819
  2. Dutchess Cotton Manufactory v. DavisNew York Supreme Court · 1817
  3. Trustees of Vernon Society v. HilesNew York Supreme Court · 1826
  4. John v. Farmers & Mechanics' BankIndiana Supreme Court · 1830
  5. Miller v. EwerSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1847

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Hun v. . CaryNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
  2. Bradley v. ReppellSupreme Court of Missouri · 1896
  3. Reichwald v. Commercial Hotel Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1883
  4. Farmers & Merchants Insurance ex rel. Benneson v. NeedlesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1873
  5. Wright v. LeeSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1892

16 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