Sullivan v. Beck

• Decision Date: 22 March 1897
• Citation: 79 F. 200
• Parties: SULLIVAN v. BECK et al.
• Court: United States Circuit Court, District of Indiana

79 F. 200

SULLIVAN v. BECK et al.

United States Circuit Court, D. Indiana.

March 22, 1897

Floyd A. Woods, Lorin C. Collins, Jr., and William Meade Fletcher for complainant.

F Winter and John L. Lewis, for defendants.

BAKER District Judge.

Bill by receiver of the American Building, Loan & Investment Society of Chicago, a corporation organized under the laws of Illinois, to foreclose a mortgage on real estate situated in this state executed by defendants to said society. The loan was made, and the note and mortgage in suit therefor were executed by and through an agent of said society with the defendants in this state on September 29, 1890. To this bill the defendants have filed a plea in abatement, grounded on sections 3453, 3454, 3456, 4464, 4483, 2 Burns' Rev.St.Ind. 1894 (sections 3022, 3023, 3025, Rev.St.Ind 1881) which it is claimed preclude the maintenance of this suit, because the provisions of said sections have not been complied with. Section 3453, Rev.St. 1894 (section 3022 Rev.St. 1881), provides that:

'Agents of corporations not incorporated or organized in this state, before entering upon the duties of their agency in this state, shall deposit in the clerk's office of the county where they propose doing business therefor the power of attorney, commission, appointment, or other authority under or by virtue of which they act as agents.'

Section 3454, Rev.St. 1894 (section 3023, Rev.St. 1881), provides that:

'Said agents shall procure from such corporations, and file with the clerk of the circuit court of the county where they propose doing business, before commencing the duties thereof, a duly authenticated order, resolution, or other sufficient authority of the board of directors or managers of such corporations, authorizing citizens or residents of this state having a claim or demand against such corporation arising out of any transaction in this state with such agents, to sue for and maintain an action in respect to the same in any court of this state of competent jurisdiction, and further authorizing service of process in such action on such agent to be valid service on such corporation, and that such service shall authorize judgment and all other proceedings against such corporation.'

Section 3456, Rev.St. 1894 (section 3025, Rev.St. 1881), provides that:

'Such foreign corporations shall not enforce, in any court of this state, any contracts made by their agents or by persons assuming to act as their agents, before a compliance by such agents or persons acting as such with the provisions of sections 3453 and 2454 (sections 3022, 3023) of this act.'

In the view which the court takes of this case, it does not become important to set out sections 4464, 4483, Rev.St. 1894. Plaintiff has set down the plea for hearing, and insists that the same is not sufficient to abate the maintenance of the present suit.

Section 3456, Rev.St. 1894 (section 3025, Rev.St. 1881), does not purport to invalidate any contract entered into before compliance with sections 3453, 3454, Rev.St. 1894 (sections 3022, 3023, Rev.St. 1881).

CO. et al.

A contract so made is valid. The only inhabitation is that it shall not be enforced in the courts of the state...