David Davis

Name: Clearwater v. Meredith — Opinion of the Court
Author: David Davis

Clearwater v. Meredith — Opinion of the Court

Summary

“Clearwater v. Meredith — Opinion of the Court”, is a work by David Davis. It explores elements such as consolidation, plea and replication.

Quotes from Clearwater v. Meredith — Opinion of the Court (David Davis)

David Davis, Clearwater v. Meredith — Opinion of the Court

“ If an issue in fact had been joined on the fifth plea, and found for the defendants, judgment was inevitable for them, because the plea was in bar of the action, and the other pleas would then have presented immaterial issues. If the plea was true, being a complete defence, it would have been useless to have tried other issues, for no matter how they might terminate, judgment must still be for the defendants. The state of pleading leaves the fifth plea, precisely as if traverse had been taken on a matter of fact in it, and determined against the plaintiff. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

David Davis, Clearwater v. Meredith — Opinion of the Court

“ The plaintiff claims that his replication is a more general traverse; and puts in issue, first, the consolidation of the companies and the stock; second, the consent of the plaintiff; and third, that the stock was thereby rendered of no value. Thus understanding the replication, it is double; and for that reason the demurrer was properly sustained.
It is not claimed that the traverse must be of a single fact, but that the traverse must be confined to a single point. The difficulty in practice is to determine what is a single point, as contradistinguished from a single fact. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

David Davis, Clearwater v. Meredith — Opinion of the Court

“ The power of the legislature to confer such authority cannot be questioned, and without the authority, railroad corporations organized separately, could not merge and consolidate their interests. But in conferring the authority, the legislature never intended to compel a dissenting stockholder to transfer his interest, because a majority of the stockholders consented to the consolidation. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

David Davis, Clearwater v. Meredith — Opinion of the Court

“ When any person takes stock in a railroad corporation, he has entered into a contract with the company, that his interests shall be subject to the direction and control of the proper authorities of the corporation to accomplish the object for which the company was organized. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

David Davis, Clearwater v. Meredith — Opinion of the Court

“ It does not follow, however, that whoever, that whoever contracts with a railroad company, or with a third party in relation to railroad property or stock, is subject to have his liabilities varied by any and all acts, which, according to law, the company may do. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

David Davis, Clearwater v. Meredith — Opinion of the Court

“ But were this not so, and were it held that if the defendants consented to the consolidation, they would still be liable on the contract; the fact of such consent is not a matter to be negatived by defendants, but the plaintiffs should reply that fact. It is a general rule of pleading that matter which should come more properly from the other side, need not be stated. Each party makes out his own case. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

David Davis, Clearwater v. Meredith — Opinion of the Court

“ It is insisted, however, inasmuch as the statute law of Indiana authorized railroads to be consolidated, that therefore the defendants contracted with a view to a possible consolidation, and are bound by it. The authorities cited do not go so far; they establish only the position that where the legislature has reserved the right to amend the charter, the subscribing stockholders, by the act of subscription under such a charter, agree to such increased liabilities as the legislature may impose. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

David Davis, Clearwater v. Meredith — Opinion of the Court

“ Gould [5] says:
'The meaning of the rule is, that when the pleading, on one side, consists of several distinct and material points, all of which are necessary to its legal sufficiency, the adverse party is allowed to traverse only one of them. ”

David Davis

Summary

Quotes from Clearwater v. Meredith — Opinion of the Court (David Davis)

Common terms

Similar works

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature