Samuel Freeman Miller

Name: Fritts v. Palmer — Opinion of the Court
Author: Samuel Freeman Miller

Summary

“Fritts v. Palmer — Opinion of the Court”, is a work by Samuel Freeman Miller. It explores elements such as corporation, real estate and conveyance.

Quotes from Fritts v. Palmer — Opinion of the Court (Samuel Freeman Miller)

Samuel Freeman Miller, Fritts v. Palmer — Opinion of the Court

“ But the positived declaration that a corporation shall not purchase or hold real estate, which is not a grant of power, but an express denial of its power to hold any real estate under the circumstances mentioned, is in my opinion destructive of the right to hold any real estate at all under those circumstances. Whenever it is shown that any of these corporations have not complied with the requirements of the statute, they are forbidden to purchase or hold real estate. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Samuel Freeman Miller, Fritts v. Palmer — Opinion of the Court

“ I can conceive of cases where corporations have been authorized to acquire a limited amount of real estate such as the legislature may conceive to be useful and necessary to the purpose for which they are organized, or to take property for specific uses, in which the question as to whether they have exceeded that amount or perverted the use may be one for the state alone, and not of any private citizen. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Samuel Freeman Miller, Fritts v. Palmer — Opinion of the Court

“ If the legislature had intended to declare that no title should pass under a conveyance to a foreign corporation purchasing real estate before it acquires the right to engage in business in the state, and that such a conveyance should be an absolute nullity as between the grantor and grantee, leaving the grantor to deal with the property as if he had never sold it, that intention would have been clearly manifested. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Samuel Freeman Miller, Fritts v. Palmer — Opinion of the Court

“ Also those holding that the question whether a corporation, having capacity to purchase and hold real estate for certain defined purposes, or in certain quantities, has taken title to real estate for purposes not authorized by law, or in excess of the quantity permitted by its charter, concerns only the state within whose limits the property is situated. It cannot be raised collaterally by private persons unless there be something in the statute expressly or by necessary implication authorizing them to do so. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Samuel Freeman Miller, Fritts v. Palmer — Opinion of the Court

“ Every company incorporated under the laws of any foreign state or kingdom, or of any state or territory of the United States beyond the limits of this state, and now or hereafter doing business within this state, shall file in the office of the secretary of state a copy of their charter of incorporation, or, in case such company is incorporated by certificate under any general incorporation law, a copy of such certificate and of such general incorporation law, duly certified and authenticated by the proper authority of such foreign state, kingdom, or territory.' Gen. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Samuel Freeman Miller, Fritts v. Palmer — Opinion of the Court

“ Where usurious interest is contracted for a forfeiture is prescribed and explicitly defined.' Again: 'Where a corporation is incompetent by its charter to take a title to real estate, a conveyance to it is not void, but only voidable, and the sovereign alone can object. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Samuel Freeman Miller, Fritts v. Palmer — Opinion of the Court

“ The policy of permitting corporations to hold real estate has always been a restricted one. Corporate bodies, whether for public use or for private purposes, have always been subjects of limitation on their right to hold real estate. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Samuel Freeman Miller, Fritts v. Palmer — Opinion of the Court

“ It is clear, from the facts agreed, that the object of Groshon's conveyance to the Comstock Mining Company was to pass to that corporation whatever interest he had in the property. It is equally clear that, under the trust-deed to Thatcher, the sale and conveyance to Fritts, and the subsequent mesne conveyances to the defendants, the latter acquired whatever interest the Comstock Mining Company got by Groshon's deed to it. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Samuel Freeman Miller, Fritts v. Palmer — Opinion of the Court

“ To the above cases may be added those holding that an alien may take by deed or devise and hold against any one but the sovereign until office found. Cross v. De Valle, 1 Wall. 1, 13; Governeur v. Robertson, 11 Wheat. ”

Samuel Freeman Miller

Summary

Quotes from Fritts v. Palmer — Opinion of the Court (Samuel Freeman Miller)

Common terms

Similar works

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature