Skip to main content
· 12/26/1895

Allen v. Olympia Light & Power Co.

Citations

  • 13 Wash. 307
  • 43 P. 55
  • 1895 Wash. LEXIS 93

Syllabus

<p>CORPORATIONS—ACTIONS AGAINST PENDING RECEIVERSHIP — CONTRACTS — RATIFICATION — PLEADING—INCONSISTENT DEFENSES.</p> <p>The appointment of a receiver of a corporation does not prevent an action against it upon a promissory note executed before the receivership.</p> <p>A corporation cannot escape obligation under its contracts on the ground of the want of authority of its officers to execute them, when the corporation has received the benefits of such contracts.</p> <p>A plea of want of consideration in an answer is inconsistent with an admission in an affirmative defense that there was a consideration for the contract sued on, and in such case plaintiff cannot be put upon proof of the matter denied.</p>

Judges: Dunbar

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.