Summary

Portrait of Sandra Day O'Connor Sandra Day O'Connor Carden v. Arkoma Associates — Dissenting Opinion

Not surprisingly, the Court viewed such an organization as more like a partnership than a corporation. See F. Burdick, Law of Partnership 361-362 (1899) (limited partnership association like corporation in some respects, but generally treated by the courts as a general partnership) . As in the case of the joint stock company, because all partners were similarly situated in terms of power and control over the company, there was no reason for the Court to inquire who, among the partners, were the real parties to the controversy.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Sandra Day O'Connor Sandra Day O'Connor Carden v. Arkoma Associates — Dissenting Opinion

Deveaux, 5 Cranch 61, 87, 3 L.Ed. 38 (1809) ("The duties of this [C] ourt, to exercise jurisdiction where it is conferred, and not to usurp it where it is not conferred, are of equal obligation. The constitution, therefore, and the law, are to be expounded, without a leaning the one way or the other, according to those general principles which usually govern in the construction of fundamental or other laws") .
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature