People v. Lowden

Citations

• 2 Cal. Unrep. 537
• 8 P. 66
• 1885 Cal. LEXIS 871

Syllabus

<p>Quo Warranto—Usurpation of Franchise—Answer.—In quo warranto proceedings for usurpation of a corporation franchise, if the verified complaint alleges facts showing the illegality of the pretended corporation, such facts must be specifically denied by the answer, and a denial of the legal conclusions drawn from the facts merely, is not sufficient.</p> <p>Corporation—Pleading—Legal Conclusions.—An allegation in a pleading that a corporation was duly, regularly, and legally formed, and that it has continued to act as such, is a mere averment of a legal conclusion and raises no issue.</p> <p>Quo Warranto—Usurpation of Franchise—Burden of Proof.— In a proceeding for usurpation of franchise of a corporation, the burden of proof is on the defendants to show that the corporation was legally formed, and that its existence is legal, and in such proceeding the answer should set forth the facts showing the same.</p> <p>Quo Warranto—Prior Proceedings a Bar.—Proceedings brought by the attorney general to determine the rights of defendants to exercise a franchise as a corporation are not barred by a prior application for a writ of mandate to compel a board of supervisors to fix rates of toll to be taken on a road claimed by the alleged corporation.</p> <p>Quo Warranto—Maintenance by Attorney General.—Estoppel.— The fact that the person on whose relation the proceeding of quo warranto, for usurpation of a corporate franchise, was instituted was at one time acting as an officer of the alleged corporation, will not operate as an estoppel against the maintenance of the action by the attorney general.1</p>