Skip to main content
· 9/15/1867

Mitchell v. Deeds

Citations

  • 49 Ill. 416

Syllabus

<p>1. Constitutional law—power of the legislature to validate an irregularly organized corporate body. The legislature have the same power to ratify and confirm an irregularly organized corporate body, that they have to create a new one.</p> <p>2. Statutes—concerning the act of Feb., 1857—confirming the acts of consolidation between certain railroads. And by the act of February 14, 1857, confirming the consolidation before then entered into, between the Savannah Branch Railroad Company and the Racine & Mississippi Railroad Company, the corporate body which was organized in accordance with the act of consolidation, became legal, notwithstanding such organization may have been irregular.</p> <p>3. Corporations—corporate existence admitted—by a party who executes his note to such body. And where a party, prior to the passage of the act of 1857, executed and delivered to the “Racine & Mississippi Railroad Company,” the corporation organized under such act of consolidation, his promissory note, and which was afterwards, and before its maturity, assigned by the company, through its president: Held, in an action upon such note by the assignee, against the maker, that the defendant, by executing his note to the company, thereby admitted its corporate existence, and in order to avoid its payment for the want of a party with whom to contract, he must prove that no such body existed in fact.</p> <p>4. Pleading at law—of the plea of md tiel corporation. The rule is well settled in this State, that under a plea of nul tiel corporation, where an organization in fact, and a user is shown, the existence of the corporate body is proved.</p> <p>5. Same—want or failure of consideration when pleaded—must be proved. This court has said, that under the tenth section of the statute regulating negotiable instruments, where a want or failure of consideration is pleaded, it must be proved by the party alleging it. Stacker v. Watson, 1 Scam. 207, and Topper v. Snow, 20 Ill. 434.</p> <p>6. Sam

Judges: Walker

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.