State v. Colias

Decision Date02 March 1907
CitationState v. Colias, 150 Ala. 515, 43 So. 190 (Ala. 1907)
PartiesSTATE EX REL. THOMPSON v. COLIAS ET AL.
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

Appeal from City Court of Birmingham; Charles A. Senn, Judge.

Quo warranto by the state, on the relation of Von L. Thompson against Thomas Colias and others. From a judgment sustaining defendants' demurrer to the petition and dismissing the petition, relator appeals. Affirmed.

This was a petition in the nature of a quo warranto, seeking to prevent the stockholders of the alleged corporation from further using, usurping, or attempting to use and usurp, the privileges and franchises granted said alleged corporation as granted by said alleged articles of incorporation. The material allegations of the petition seeking to annul the corporation are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court, and a judgment sustaining demurrers and dismissing the petition was entered, and from this judgment this appeal is prosecuted.

Von L Thompson, in pro. per. Powell & Blackburn, for appellees.

DENSON J.

Nicholas Colias and Christo Jebeles, during the year 1900 and for some time prior thereto, did a general mercantile business in the city of Birmingham as partners under the firm name and style of "Jebeles & Colias." The petition shows that on the 4th day of December, 1900, while they were doing business under said firm name, they, together with one S. Gianoakos filed their application in writing in the office of the probate judge of Jefferson county, praying to be incorporated under the name of "Jebeles & Colias Company." On the 6th of December, 1900, the probate judge issued a certificate of incorporation in which it was recited that upon the written application of the parties above named they had been incorporated under the name and style of "Jebeles & Colias Company." Section 1286 of the Code of 1896 is in this language: "No certificate of incorporation shall issue to any corporation under the same corporate name as that already assumed by another corporation of the state unless it be the successor of such other corporation; nor when the corporate name assumed is that of a person or firm, unless there be joined thereto some word designating the business to be carried on, followed by the word 'company' or 'corporation.' If any corporation shall hereinafter assume as its corporate name, the name of a person or firm without the qualification above required in such case, the organization of such corporation is void, and the stockholders are liable as partners."

It will be observed that the certificate of incorporation, when compared with the statute, is defective in failing to use some word, before the word "Company," designating the business to be carried on. Section 1282 of the Code of 1896 is in this language: "When any private corporation heretofore or hereinafter created under the laws of this state, has accidently or inadvertently failed to comply with the requisitions of the statute in its organization, it shall be lawful for the president of such corporation to supply such omission by filing with the probate judge who issued the certificate of incorporation, a statement, under oath, setting forth such omission and supplying the same, which shall be filed with the other papers of such corporation and recorded. And such filing shall relate back to the date of such incorporation, except as to the rights of third parties which may have intervened." It is shown by the application of the relator that on the 4th day of December, 1902, a statement in all respects in compliance with section 1282 was filed in the office of the judge of probate of Jefferson county, in which it was shown that the incorporators had by accident, mistake, or inadvertence omitted to join with the name "Jebeles & Colias" any word designating the business to be carried on, and it is asked in the "statement" that the omission may be supplied by inserting the word "Confectionery" immediately after the words "Jebeles & Colias," and before the word "company," wherever the name of the corporation appears in the declaration papers. With the word supplied, the name of the corporation reads as follows: "Jebeles & Colias Confectionery Company." The statement, as shown by the application of the relator, was filed with the other papers of the incorporation and was recorded. Code 1896, § 1282.

The insistence of the relator is that the initial effort to...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
4 cases
  • Hughes v. Bullen
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • February 10, 1923
    ... ... The Act ... of March 2, 1901, and Code, § 3347, cannot be soundly ... interpreted without taking due account of the state of the ... then existing law pertinent to the subject-matters of Code, ... §§ 3347, 3348 ... When ... the Act of March 2, 1901 (cited ... voidable only. In statutes the term "void" is often ... construed to signify voidable only. State ex rel. v ... Colias, 150 Ala. 515, 43 So. 190; 40 Cyc. pp. 214-217, ... and notes where the significance of the term "void" ... is treated. It is to be particularly ... ...
  • Snell v. Roach
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • March 2, 1907
    ... ... what has been said it results that the court erred in giving ... the general charge in favor of the plaintiff. It may be well ... to state, however, that we do not mean to say that the ... plaintiff could not recover her share of the undivided ... one-third of the land which was owned ... ...
  • State v. Citizens' Light & Power Co.
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • April 18, 1911
    ...on Corporations (2d Ed.) vol. 1, § 69. Section 2 of the act of 1903 is unlike the statute considered in the case of State ex rel. v. Colias, 150 Ala. 515, 43 So. 190, as it does not declare the result of a therewith as to name. Moreover, what was said in said case, as to results if certain ......
  • Gelders v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • June 30, 1909
    ... ... 1282 of that Code (which is identical with section 3461 of ... the Code of 1907), and that, so construing it, the ... organization was voidable rather than void, and, when the ... defect had been remedied under section 1282, it was cured ... State ex rel. Thompson v. Colias et al., 150 Ala ... 515, 519, 43 So. 190. The defect in that case was as fatal as ... in this, and the statute explicitly declared the organization ... void; nor was that merely a defect which could be remedied by ... the affidavit of the president alone, but the new word had to ... be ... ...