Snell v. Amite Oil Co.

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Snell v. Amite Oil Co.

151 So. 70, 178 La. 176, 1933 La. LEXIS 1831

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedOctober 30, 1933

DocketNo. 32236.

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 151 So. 70 (Snell v. Amite Oil Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Snell v. Amite Oil Co., 151 So. 70, 178 La. 176, 1933 La. LEXIS 1831 (La. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

OVERTON, Justice.

This is a, suit to foreclose a mortgage by executory process, alleged to have been executed by defendant, through its president, by virtue of a resolution of its board of directors. An order of seizure and sale was granted plaintiff. Defendant has appealed suspensively from this order. Its complaint is that it does not appear in the manner prescribed by law that its president was authorized to grant the mortgage.

To pnable the president of a corporation to bind it he must be authorized to do so. Such authority is generally granted by a resolution of the corporation’s board of directors. The law expressly provides the degree of proof necessary to establish the granting of the requisite authority for the purpose of obtaining executory process. It provides that: “In all applications for executory process against property mortgaged by a corporation, a copy of the resolution of the Board of Directors authorizing the execution of the mortgage on behalf of the corporation, taken from the copy certified by the secretary and attached to the original act of mortgage, and certified by the notary before whom the Act was passed, or from the mortgage or conveyance records, when the records show that the copy filed for record was certified by the secretary, and certified by the recorder, shall be sufficient evidence of the authority of the officer or agent to execute same. * * * ” Act No. 148 of 1910, p. 226.

There is in this case no resolution, certified to by the secretary of the corporation and by the notary, or by the recorder, as provided by the act — in fact no resolution of the board of directors was attached to the petition for executory process, or otherwise appears in the record, although it is alleged that one was attached.

In these circumstances nothing remains to be done but to set aside the order of executory process. Bank of Leesville v. Wingate, 123 La. 386, 48 So. 1005.

For these reasons, the order of executory process is set aside, and the application therefor is dismissed at plaintiff’s costs.

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

OVERTON, Justice.

This is a, suit to foreclose a mortgage by executory process, alleged to have been executed by defendant, through its president, by virtue of a resolution of its board of directors. An order of seizure and sale was granted plaintiff. Defendant has appealed suspensively from this order. Its complaint is that it does not appear in the manner prescribed by law that its president was authorized to grant the mortgage.

To pnable the president of a corporation to bind it he must be authorized to do so. Such authority is generally granted by a resolution of the corporation’s board of directors. The law expressly provides the degree of proof necessary to establish the granting of the requisite authority for the purpose of obtaining executory process. It provides that: “In all applications for executory process against property mortgaged by a corporation, a copy of the resolution of the Board of Directors authorizing the execution of the mortgage on behalf of the corporation, taken from the copy certified by the secretary and attached to the original act of mortgage, and certified by the notary before whom the Act was passed, or from the mortgage or conveyance records, when the records show that the copy filed for record was certified by the secretary, and certified by the recorder, shall be sufficient evidence of the authority of the officer or agent to execute same. * * * ” Act No. 148 of 1910, p. 226.

There is in this case no resolution, certified to by the secretary of the corporation and by the notary, or by the recorder, as provided by the act — in fact no resolution of the board of directors was attached to the petition for executory process, or otherwise appears in the record, although it is alleged that one was attached.

In these circumstances nothing remains to be done but to set aside the order of executory process. Bank of Leesville v. Wingate, 123 La. 386, 48 So. 1005.

For these reasons, the order of executory process is set aside, and the application therefor is dismissed at plaintiff’s costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

151 So. 70, 178 La. 176, 1933 La. LEXIS 1831, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/snell-v-amite-oil-co-la-1933.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack