{
  "id": 5102878,
  "name": "John B. Legnard v. Crane Company",
  "name_abbreviation": "Legnard v. Crane Co.",
  "decision_date": "1894-04-30",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "149",
  "last_page": "151",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "54 Ill. App. 149"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "49 N. W. Rep. 223",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.W.",
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "138 Ill. 67",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5447467
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/138/0067-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "50 Miss. 244",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Miss.",
      "case_ids": [
        1673539
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/miss/50/0244-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "25 Mich. 214",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Mich.",
      "case_ids": [
        1311078
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/mich/25/0214-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "7 Bush. (Ky.) 635",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Bush",
      "case_ids": [
        4383885
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ky/70/0635-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "3 W. Va. 164",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "W. Va.",
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "36 Fed. Rep. 273",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "F.",
      "case_ids": [
        6729559
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/f/36/0273-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "32 Neb. 242",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Neb.",
      "case_ids": [
        2351743
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/neb/32/0242-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "15 Ill. 266",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        436625
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/15/0266-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "30 Ill. App. 98",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        2422874
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/30/0098-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "2 Scam. 422",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Scam.",
      "case_ids": [
        2474371
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/3/0422-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "49 N. W. Rep. 223",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.W.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 300,
    "char_count": 3859,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.489,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 9.055339759587133e-08,
      "percentile": 0.5048070370125826
    },
    "sha256": "893bee3bf565880a0fa84a4fcbb23654851779509a4132b9a13214ba44ac09bd",
    "simhash": "1:920690b3d66ddb29",
    "word_count": 695
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:49:51.601388+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "John B. Legnard v. Crane Company."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Gary\ndelivered the opinion of the Court.\nThis is an action of assumpsit upon a promissory note, the declaration beginning, \u201c The Crane Company, a corporation, plaintiff.\u201d\nThe appellant demurred \u2014 the demurrer was overruled\u2014 and the appellant abiding by the demurrer, the appellee presented the note, a witness testified to a computation of interest, and the court rendered judgment for the amount due.\nThe only question presented that is not mere rubbish, is, whether the appellee should have set out in the declaration how it became, or is, a corporation.\nIn effect this was decided in the negative in Bank of Washtenaw v. Montgomery, 2 Scam. 422.\nAppearance by a defendant in a name which, not being the name or names of a person or persons, must, to be the name of a legal entity, be the name of a corporation, is an admission that such defendant is a corporation. Supreme Lodge v. Zuhlke, 30 Ill. App. 98.\nOn the same principle such appearance by a plaintiff is an assertion that it is a corporation, only to be denied by a special plea of nuL tiel corporation. Morris v. Trustees of Schools, 15 Ill. 266.\nTire quotation made from the declaration shows that it contains surplusage\u2014the words \u201c a corporation \u201d being unnecessary. Exchange Nat. Bank v. Capps, 32 Neb. 242; S. C., 49 N. W. Rep. 223.\nThe judgment is affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Gary"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Appellant\u2019s Brief, E. K. Smith and E. M. Ehrlich, Attorneys.",
      "Appellee\u2019s Brief, Wilber, Eldridge & Pinney, Attorneys."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "John B. Legnard v. Crane Company.\n1. Corporations\u2014Admission of Corporate Existence.\u2014The appearance of a defendant in a name which, not being the name of a person or persons, must, to be the name of a legal entity, be the name of a corporation, is an admission that such defendant is a corporation.\n2. Corporate Existence\u2014Denial by Plea, When Necessary.\u2014An appearance by a plaintiff as a corporation, is an assertion that it is a corporation, to be denied only by a special plea of nul tiel corporation.\nMemorandum.\u2014Assumpsit upon a promissory note. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Thomas G. Windes, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in this court at the March term, 1894,\nand affirmed.\nOpinion filed April 30, 1894.\nThe opinion states the case.\nAppellant\u2019s Brief, E. K. Smith and E. M. Ehrlich, Attorneys.\nIn order to sue, a corporation must be duly organized; it must show where it was organized, for a corporation is an inhabitant of the State that created it, or of the State where it kee] s its records and principal office, and exists only in contemplation of law aid by force of law, and can have no legal existence beyond the State or sovereignty by which it is created. Connor v. Vicksburg & M. R. Co., 36 Fed. Rep. 273; Rice v. Newport News & M. V. R. Co., 3 W. Va. 164.\nA corporation can have no legal existence out of the State creating it. The exercise of any power in another State depends on the will of that State. Gill v. Ky. Min. Co., 7 Bush. (Ky.) 635; Thompson v. Waters, 25 Mich. 214; N. O., J. & G. R. R. Co. v. Wallace, 50 Miss. 244; Bank of Augusta v. Earle, 13 Pet. (U. S.) 512; O. & M. R. Co. v. Wheeler, 1 Black (U. S.) 286; Liverpool Ins. Co. v. Moss, 10 Wall. (U. S.) 566.\nIt is essential that a corporation should set out and allege that it is a body duly and legally incorporated by and under the laws of the State, and a corporation may be required to state whether it is a foreign or domestic corporation. 2 Beach on Private Corporations, Sec. 863; Natl. Temp. Soc., etc., v. Anderson (1888), 2 N. Y. Supl. 49.\nAppellee\u2019s Brief, Wilber, Eldridge & Pinney, Attorneys.\n\u201c The general rule is that one who deals with a corporation as existing de facto, is estopped to deny as against it that it has been legally organized.\u201d Bushnell v. Consolidated Ice Mach. Co., 138 Ill. 67.\nThe defendant executed the note sued on, to plaintiff, and having thus dealt with it, he is therefore estopped to deny it is legally organized. Exchange Nat. Bk. of Hastings v. Capps, 49 N. W. Rep. 223."
  },
  "file_name": "0149-01",
  "first_page_order": 147,
  "last_page_order": 149
}