United Lead Co. v. J.W. Reedy Elevator Mfg. Co.

• Citation: 78 N.E. 567,222 Ill. 199
• Parties: UNITED LEAD CO. v. J. W. REEDY ELEVATOR MFG. CO.
• Decision Date: 10 October 1906
• Court: Supreme Court of Illinois

222 Ill. 199

78 N.E. 567

UNITED LEAD CO.

v.J. W. REEDY ELEVATOR MFG. CO.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

June 14, 1906.

Rehearing Denied October 10, 1906.

Appeal from Appellate Court, First District.

Action by the United Lead Company against the J. W. Reedy Elevator Manufacturing Company. From a judgment of the Appellate Court affirming a judgment in favor of defendant, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.Charles H. Blatchford (Ralph M. Shaw, of counsel), for appellant.

Albert N. & Edw. S. Eastman, for appellee.

The Appellate Court for the First District affirmed the judgment of the circuit court of Cook county, which was in favor of appellee, in a suit in assumpsit brought in the latter court by appellant against appellee. A certificate of importance having been obtained, the cause is brought here by further appeal. The following statement of the facts is that of the Appellate Court:

‘September 8, 1904, appellant, a New Jersey corporation, doing business in the state of Illinois, brought suit for goods sold and delivered, against appellee. On December 7, 1904, appellee moved to dismiss upon the ground that appellant, at the time of bringing suit and when the motion was made, was and is a foreign corporation doing business in Illinois, and had not filed with the Secretary of State its articles or certificate of incorporation and was not authorized to do business in Illinois. This motion was supported by an affidavit. Upon the hearing on this motion it was denied and appellee was given leave to file pleas instanter. In obedience to this order appellee filed the general issue and a special plea, which is, in substance, as follows: ‘And for a further plea, by leave of court, defendant says that plaintiff is organized for profit, is not a railroad or telegraph company, nor in the insurance, banking or money loaning business; that the merchandise for which suit is brought was sold to defendant and by it brought within the state of Illinois since January 1, 1902; plaintiff had not at the commencement of this suit, as by the statute provided, filed with the Secretary of State its articles or certificate of incorporation, statement of capital stock represented in Illinois, nor designated officer on whom service could be had; nor had the Secretary of State, at commencement of suit, issued certificate entitling plaintiff to do business in Illinois as provided by statute; nor had plaintiff, prior to or at the commencement of suit, been licensed to do business in Illinois as by statute provided; plaintiff at the time of commencement of suit had no certificate of authority, nor had any ever been issued to it, to do business in Illinois as provided by the statutes of said state. Wherefore, by force of the statute in such case made and provided, the plaintiff cannot maintain its aforesaid action. And this defendant is ready to verify. Therefore, it prays judgment if plaintiff ought to have its aforesaid action against it,’ etc. Appellee filed a similiter to the general issue and demurred to the special plea. The court overruled the demurrer. Appellant elected to stand by the demurrer. Thereupon the court ordered, ‘therefore it is considered by the court that defendant go hence without day and that plaintiff takes nothing by the aforesaid action,’ and entered a judgment for costs against appellant. The case is brought to this court by appeal. Appellant assigns as error the action of the trial court in overruling its demurrer and entering judgment in bar of its cause of action.'

SCOTT, C. J. (after stating the...