Moorman Manufacturing Co. v. Haack
This text of 160 N.W. 258 (Moorman Manufacturing Co. v. Haack) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Action to recover for merchandise sold and delivered. The action was [127]*127dismissed at the close of the plaintiff’s testimony and judgment was entered. The defendant appeals from the judgment.
The complaint alleges that the defendant is an Illinois corporation. The defendant specifically denies it. There was no proof of incorpo-. ration. The sale and delivery of the merchandise is conceded. The action was dismissed because of lack of proof of thg incorporation of the plaintiff. The fact of corporate existence was not a material issue. It was not necessary to prove it. Finch, Van Slyck & McConville v. Le Sueur County Co-operative Co. 128 Minn. 73, 150 N. W. 226; Holden v. Great Western Ele. Co. 69 Minn. 527, 72 N. W. 805, 65 Am. St. 505. Whether the defendant’s denial was sufficient under G. S. 1913, § 7774 (E. L. 1905), § 4148, we need not consider.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
160 N.W. 258, 135 Minn. 126, 1916 Minn. LEXIS 516, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moorman-manufacturing-co-v-haack-minn-1916.