Western Railway v. McCall

89 Ala. 375
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedNovember 15, 1889
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 89 Ala. 375 (Western Railway v. McCall) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Western Railway v. McCall, 89 Ala. 375 (Ala. 1889).

Opinion

McCLELLAN, J.

The present suit was instituted against the “Atlanta & West Point Railroad and Western Railway of Alabama, a foreign corporation incorporated under the law of the State of Georgia, and doing business by its agents in said county of Lowndes, State of Alabama.” An amended complaint was filed, by leave of the court; in which, by amendment, it was proposed to change the corporate name of defendant, so as to make it read “the Western Railway of Alabama Company,” and to sue it as a domestic corporation incorporated under the law of the State of Alabama.

Railroad charters are not public statutes of which we can [376]*376take judicial notice. We cannot judicially know that there is, or is not, a railroad company incorporated under the laws of Georgia, known as “Atlanta & West Point Railroad and Western Railway of Alabama Company.” Nor can we know judicially that there is, or is not,- a railroad company incorporated under the laws of Alabama, known as the “Western Railway of Alabama Company.” Corporations are entities — artificial persons — capable of suing and being sued, and, like natural persons, have names by which they are known. When they are parties to litigation, they should be designated by their corporate name; but a slight departure would be immaterial, provided they would be readily recognized by the name used.

The departure in this case is so radical — a substitution of an Alabama corporation, having an expressed name, for a Georgia corporation, having another and distinctly different name — that we feel bound to hold that it is a change of the sole party defendant. This can not be done, as our decisions have uniformly held.—Western R. R. Co. v. Davis, 66 Ala. 578; Davis Avenue R. R. Co. v. Mallon, 57 Ala. 168; Laird v. Moore, 27 Ala. 326. The motion to strike the amended complaint from the file should have been granted.

There are probably other errors in the record, but we need not consider them. The judgment of the Circuit Court is reversed, and the cause remanded.

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

Related

Capital Transport Co. v. Alabama Public Service Commission
108 So. 2d 156 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1959)
Ex Parte Textile Workers Union of America
30 So. 2d 247 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1947)
Van Landingham v. Alabama Great Southern R. Co.
8 So. 2d 266 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1942)
Altpeter v. Postal Telegraph-Cable Co.
148 P. 241 (California Court of Appeal, 1915)
City of Birmingham v. Darden
1 Ala. App. 479 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1911)
Manistee Mill Co. v. Hobdy
51 So. 871 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1909)
Mobile Light & Railroad v. MacKay
48 So. 509 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1909)
Zukowski v. Armour
107 Ill. App. 663 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1903)
Vinegar Bend Lumber Co. v. Chicago Title & Trust Co.
131 Ala. 411 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1901)
Steiner Bros. v. Stewart
134 Ala. 568 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1901)
Savannah, Americus & Montgomery Railway v. Buford
106 Ala. 303 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1894)
Singer Manufacturing Co. v. Greenleaf
100 Ala. 272 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1893)
Ex parte Nicrosi
103 Ala. 104 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1893)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
89 Ala. 375, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/western-railway-v-mccall-ala-1889.