Hayhurst v. Boyd Hospital
| Decision Date | 05 March 1924 |
| Citation | 38 Idaho 633,224 P. 78 |
| Parties | NATHAN HAYHURST, Respondent, v. BOYD HOSPITAL, a Corporation, Appellant |
| Court | Idaho Supreme Court |
ACTION AGAINST CORPORATION-FORFEITURE OF CHARTER-PROSECUTION TO JUDGMENT.
If a corporation's charter is forfeited during the pendency of an action against it, the action does not abate, but may be prosecuted to final judgment without substitution. (C. S sec. 4791.)
APPEAL from the District Court of the Eleventh Judicial District for Twin Falls County.
Motion for substitution of parties appellant. Denied.
Motion for substitution denied.
Bothwell & Chapman, for Respondent.
The judgment obtained in this case is valid. A substitution is permissible. (Lowe v. Superior Court, 165 Cal. 708 134 P. 190; Brandon v. Umpqua Lumber & Timber Co., 166 Cal. 322, 136 P. 62; Kehrlein-Swinerton Const. Co. v Rapken, 30 Cal.App. 11, 156 P. 972; Slayden v. O'Dea, 182 Cal. 500, 189 P. 1062; Rowe v. Stevens, 25 Idaho 237, 137 P. 159.)
Substitution is permissible under our practice as indicated in the recent decision of Holter v. Hauser, 33 Idaho 406, 195 P. 628.
Walters & Parry, for Appellant.
Respondent's judgment is void, and since substitution is attempted to correct a judicial error it cannot be allowed.
"The effect of the dissolution of a corporation is to terminate its existence as a legal entity, and render it incapable of suing or being sued." (Crossman v. Vivienda Water Co., 150 Cal. 575, 89 P. 335; Newhall v. Western Zinc Mining Co., 164 Cal. 380, 128 P. 1040.)
"The effect of a forfeiture of the charter of a corporation, whether from nonpayment of its corporation license tax or for other cause, is to terminate its existence as a legal entity, and a judgment against it in a suit thereafter brought is a mere nullity; any attempted appearance for it conferring no jurisdiction." (Slayden v. O'Dea, 182 Cal. 500, 189 P. 1062; Nezik v. Cole, 43 Cal.App. 130, 184 P. 523; Sharp v. Eagle Lumber Co., 60 Cal.App. 386, 212 P. 933.)
Respondent brought its action against appellant on October 21, 1918, when the latter was a corporation incorporated and existing under the laws of the state of Idaho, and obtained judgment on December 22, 1922. The appeal was perfected March 20, 1923. Respondent now moves in this court that T. O. Boyd, T. O. Boyd, Jr., Lydia Boyd McGinn and Mary Mitchell be substituted as the parties appellant in lieu of the Boyd Hospital. This motion is made upon a showing that the corporation forfeited its charter on November 30, 1921, and the individuals mentioned became its trustees by reason of the fact that they were its directors.
Counsel who appeared for the Boyd Hospital, a corporation, in the lower court and perfected this appeal in its behalf resist the motion.
C. S., sec. 4791, provides as follows:
"No action pending against any corporation, at the time of such forfeiture, shall abate thereby, but may be prosecuted to final judgment, and the same may be enforced by execution with the same force and effect, and in like manner as though no forfeiture had occurred."
This refers to the forfeiture of a corporate...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lusk Lumber Co. v. Independent Producers Consol.
...or the court may allow the person to whom the transfer is made to be substituted in the action or proceeding." In Hayhurst v. Boyd Hospital, 38 Idaho 633, 224 P. 78, appeared that the respondent, on October 21, 1918, brought an action against appellant, an Idaho corporation, and obtained a ......