Ryan Live-stock & Feeding Co. v. Kelly

81 P. 470, 71 Kan. 874, 1905 Kan. LEXIS 285
Supreme Court of Kansas·Decided July 7, 1905·No. No. 14,096·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The plaintiff in this case is a private foreign corporation, and it was conceded upon the trial that it had not at the commencement of the action complied with the corporation laws of the state of Kansas, but it was proved that, prior to the trial of the case, it had complied therewith, and had received a certificate from the secretary of state evidencing that fact.

The sole question presented in this case is whether the corporation, not having filed the statement and procured the certificate required by law before the commencement of the action, could comply with the law thereafter and maintain the action. The court below decided this question in the negative and dismissed the action. The judgment is reversed on the authority of The State v. Book Co., 69 Kan. 1, 76 Pac. 411, Deere v. Wyland, 69 id. 255, 76 Pac. 863, and Hamilton v. Reeves & Co., 69 id. 844, 76 Pac. 418.

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

Ryan Live-stock & Feeding Co. v. Kelly, 81 P. 470, 71 Kan. 874, 1905 Kan. LEXIS 285 (kan 1905).

81 P. 470 (Ryan Live-stock & Feeding Co. v. Kelly) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Alliance Steel, Inc. v. Piland
134 P.3d 669 (Court of Appeals of Kansas, 2006)
AHL Inc. of Delaware v. Star Ins. Co.
10 F. Supp. 2d 1216 (D. Kansas, 1998)
Ottawa Condensing Co. v. Dawkins
120 P. 356 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1912)
National Fertilizer Co. v. Fall River Five Cents Savings Bank
82 N.E. 671 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1907)
International Trust Co. v. A. Leschen & Sons Rope Co.
41 Colo. 299 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1907)
Ward Land & Stock Co. v. Mapes
82 P. 426 (California Supreme Court, 1905)