Austin City R. R. v. Swisher

1 White & W. 33
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 12, 1880
DocketNo. 833, Op. Book No. 3, p. 426
StatusPublished

This text of 1 White & W. 33 (Austin City R. R. v. Swisher) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Austin City R. R. v. Swisher, 1 White & W. 33 (Tex. Ct. App. 1880).

Opinion

Opinion by

Clark, J.

§ 75. Officers of corporation, compensation of. An officer of a corporation cannot recover of the corporation any salary or compensation for services rendered, unless such salary or compensation has been fixed and agreed upon by the proper corporate authorities in some authorized manner, anterior to the performance of the services. [Kilpatrick v. Bridge Co. 49 Penn. St. 118; Holder v. R. R. Co. 71 Ill. 106.] This principle is not affected, although the corporate authorities, by subsequent resolution, agree to pay for such past services. A recovery at law cannot be had on such agreement. [Loan Ass’n v. Stonemetz, 29 Penn. St. 534; R. R. Co. v. Ketchum, 27 Conn. 170; Dunston v. Gas Co. 3 B. & Ad. 125.]

§ 7 6. Trustee and cestui que trust; disqualified from,' acting, token. A president or director of a corporation! bears the relation of trustee to the corporation, and is; [34]*34disqualified from acting officially upon any matter of immediate personal and pecuniary interest to himself. [Butts v. Wood, 37 N. Y. 317.]

June 12, 1880.

§ 77. Meetings of corporation. A corporation is not represented by every casual meeting of a majority of its governing body, and all the directors, acting personally without an official meeting, could not bind the corporation. [Leonard v. Lent, 43 Wis. 83; Ang. & Ames on Corp. §§ 231, 489, 491, 492.]

Reversed and remanded.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Butts v. . Wood
37 N.Y. 317 (New York Court of Appeals, 1867)
New York & New Haven Railroad v. Ketchum
27 Conn. 170 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1858)
Leonard v. Lent
43 Wis. 83 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1877)
Holder v. Lafayette, Bloomington & Mississippi Ry. Co.
71 Ill. 106 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1873)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 White & W. 33, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/austin-city-r-r-v-swisher-texapp-1880.