Larned v. Beal

23 A. 149, 65 N.H. 184
Supreme Court of New Hampshire·Decided June 5, 1889·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Doe, C. J.

It is not material in this case whether the corporation de facto was a corporation de jure or not. A want of *185 regularity in its organization would not affect the validity of its contract with the plaintiff, and would not give him, against its members, as unincorporated persons, an action on a contract which he made with them as a corporation. S. F. Bridge v. Fisk, 28 N. H. 171, 178; Ossipee Manf'g Co. v. Canney, 54 N. H. 295, 312, 313; Saunders v. Farmer, 62 N. H. 572; Jewell v. Gilbert, 64 N. H. 13, 18; Case v. Kelly, 133 U. S. 21, 28; Mor. Corp., ss. 744-755.

Judgment for the defendants.

Smith, J., did not sit: the others concurred.

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

Larned v. Beal, 23 A. 149, 65 N.H. 184 (N.H. 1889).

23 A. 149 (Larned v. Beal) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mitchell v. Carter
1912 OK 204 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1912)
Doty v. Patterson
56 N.E. 668 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1900)
Kenneth v. Company
39 A. 585 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1895)
State v. Nelson
32 La. Ann. 842 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1880)
State v. Arata
32 La. Ann. 193 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1880)