Empire Mills v. Alston Grocery Co.

4 Willson 346
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJanuary 17, 1891
DocketNo. 2983
StatusPublished

This text of 4 Willson 346 (Empire Mills v. Alston Grocery Co.) 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
Empire Mills v. Alston Grocery Co., 4 Willson 346 (Tex. Ct. App. 1891).

Opinions

Opinion by

Willson, J.

§ 221. Foreign corporation; liability of as a copartnership; when such corporation is 'invalid in this state; comity of states; case stated. Appellant sued appellee to recover an alleged indebtedness. Appellant alleged that appellee company was a copartnership firm composed of several individuals, naming them. Appellees > denied the copartnership under oath. In a supplemental petition appellant alleged that said company had obtained a charter from the state of Iowa authorizing it to do a mercantile business in the state of Texas; that said charter was not authorized by the laws of Texas, and operated as a fraud upon said laws, etc.; and that appellees were in fact and in law a copartnership, and liable as such. A general demurrer to said supplemental petition was sustained, and this ruling of the court was, we think, erroneous. It was made to appear on the trial, as alleged in said supplemental petition, that appellees’ company was doing a mercantile business in Dallas, Texas, under said Iowa charter, and in the course of said business contracted the indebtedness sued for herein; that said charter was obtained in Iowa because the laws of Texas did not permit such a corporation, and was obtained in order to evade the laws of Texas. We are of the opinion that said charter, in so far as it was intended to operate in said state, is absolutely void, and that in [347]*347conducting said business appellees were in fact and in law copartners, and not a corporation, and that the court erred in rendering judgment for appellee.

January 17, 1891. (Overruled February 25, 1891.)

Reversed and remanded.

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

Related

Runyan v. Lessee of Coster
39 U.S. 122 (Supreme Court, 1840)
Paul v. Virginia
75 U.S. 168 (Supreme Court, 1869)
Christian Union v. Yount
101 U.S. 352 (Supreme Court, 1880)
Kaiser v. Lawrence Savings Bank
8 N.W. 772 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1881)
The Nat. Bk. of Watertown v. . Landon
45 N.Y. 410 (New York Court of Appeals, 1871)
Fuller v. . Rowe
57 N.Y. 23 (New York Court of Appeals, 1874)
Merrick v. . Van Santvoord
34 N.Y. 208 (New York Court of Appeals, 1866)
Franco-Texan Land Co. v. Laigle
59 Tex. 339 (Texas Supreme Court, 1883)
Texas Land & Mortgage Co. v. Worsham
13 S.W. 384 (Texas Supreme Court, 1890)
Miller v. Ewer
27 Me. 509 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1847)
Exchange Bank v. Monteath
12 N.Y. 505 (New York Court of Appeals, 1863)
Garnett v. Richardson
35 Ark. 144 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1879)
McCall v. Byram Manufacturing Co.
6 Conn. 428 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1827)
Thompson v. Waters
25 Mich. 214 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1872)
Abbott v. Omaha Smelting & Refining Co.
4 Neb. 416 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1876)
Metropolitan Bank v. Godfrey
23 Ill. 579 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1860)
Pettis v. Atkins
60 Ill. 454 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1871)
Starkweather v. American Bible Society
72 Ill. 50 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1874)
Bigelow v. Gregory
73 Ill. 197 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1874)
Wright v. Bundy
11 Ind. 398 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1858)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
4 Willson 346, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/empire-mills-v-alston-grocery-co-texapp-1891.