OCR Text |
Show SUPREME COURT REVERSES ITSELF Second Opinion Handed Down in Case of Hooth vs. Wei-gand. Wei-gand. JUSTICE BARTGH HOLDS TO HIS ORIGINAL VIEW Point in Case an Important One to Foreign Corporations. Corpora-tions. Thr State Supreme court, In an opinion written i Justice Btraup, cuncurred in by Justice MoCarty and dissented from by Chief JiiBtlce Bartch, reversed a former opinion of the court Wednewlay In the caso of A Dooth & Co. vs. G. M. Wel- Kund, appellant, Action in Lower Court. In tho lower court the company sued Welgand to recover on three causes of action for goods sold and delivered, the Becond and third causes being on assigned claims. Welgiind pleaded that the company com-pany was a foreign corporation and that It did not have the legal capacity to suo Mm In this city, because It h;ul failed to comply with the laws of the State in regard re-gard to the Ming ui" its articles of incorporation incor-poration with the Secretary of State, etc Weigand Appealed. The lower court found In favor of the company, howev r, and YVelgand appealed to the Supreme court That tribunal In an opinion written by Justice Bartch, concurred con-curred in by chief Justice Baakln and II-jhi nte,i from by Justice McCarty, reversed re-versed tho Judgnvnt of the lower court Later Justice Buskin left tho bench and Justice Btraup took his place This left the two old members of the court on opposite op-posite sides of tho case, with Justice Straup neutral, ho having had nothing to do with the matter Still later, a petition for rehearing was granted and the court now reverses its lormer opinion and uf-llrms uf-llrms the Judgment of the lower court, which was In favor of the company. What Court Now Holds. Tho court now holds that the Legislature Legisla-ture plainly did not Intend, by Its enactment enact-ment of the statute governing foreign corporations, cor-porations, to render void and unenforceable unenforce-able such contracts us formed the basis of tho company's suit against Welgand; and further that the duty of compelling foreign corporations to comply with the law lies with the State officers, within whose Jurisdiction the matter falls and that private citizens cannot take the benefit bene-fit of non-compliance on the part of such corporatlcns, as was attempted in the caso under consideration. |