State Ex Rel. Standard Tank Car Co. v. Sullivan
Supreme Court of Missouri
Mandamus. (1) If the foreign corporation is legally qualified to do business in this State, and has complied with the law relating to foreign corporations, the Secetary of State has no discretion to refuse granting the license. Secs. 3037, 3030, R. S. 1909; State ex rel. v. Cook, 181 Mo. 596. (2) All statutes in pari materia are to be construed together and their meaning is to be determined from a consideration of all their provisions.
Read the full summary
Mandamus. (1) If the foreign corporation is legally qualified to do business in this State, and has complied with the law relating to foreign corporations, the Secetary of State has no discretion to refuse granting the license. Secs. 3037, 3030, R. S. 1909; State ex rel. v. Cook, 181 Mo. 596. (2) All statutes in pari materia are to be construed together and their meaning is to be determined from a consideration of all their provisions. State to use. v. Heman, 70 Mo. 441; Cole v. Skrainka, 105 Mo. 303; Kane v. Railroad, 112 Mo. 34; Macke v. Byrd, 131 Mo. 682; St. Louis v. Howard, 119 Mo. 41;…
1Opinion of the CourtGoode, J.
Relator, the Standard Tank Car Company, is a corporation organized under the general statutes of the State of Delaware providing for the organization of corporations, has complied in all respects with those laws, and received a certificate of incorporation from said state, empowering it “to engage in the business of manufactoring, producing, constructing, buying, selling and dealing in railway, passenger, freight, tank and street cars and railroad equipment and appliances. ’ ’ The number of shares of the capital stock authorized by the certificate of incorporation is 130,000, divided into…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Cowell v. Springs Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Christian Union v. YountSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- State ex inf. Crow v. West Side Street Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1898
- Daggs v. Orient InsuranceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1896
- Stevens v. PrattIllinois Supreme Court · 1881
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Commonwealth Acceptance Corp. v. JordanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
- Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. MiddlekampDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 1921
- Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad v. HarmonMontana Supreme Court · 1931
- State Ex Rel. City of St. Louis v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of Missouri · 1932
- Hemphill v. JacksonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1957
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.