Western Ry. of Alabama v. McCall
| Decision Date | 30 April 1890 |
| Citation | 7 So. 650,89 Ala. 375 |
| Parties | WESTERN RY. OF ALABAMA v. MCCALL. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from circuit court, Lowndes county; JOHN MOORE, Judge.
Harrison & Ligon, for appellant.
Girard Cook, for appellee.
The present suit was instituted against "Atlanta & West Point Railroad and Western Railway of Alabama, a foreign corporation, incorporated under the law of the state of Georgia, and doing business by its agents in said county of Lowndes, state of Alabama." An amended complaint was filed by leave of the court, in which, by amendment, it was proposed to change the corporate name of defendant, so as to make it read "The Western Railway of Alabama Company," and to sue it as a domestic corporation, incorporated under the law of the state of Alabama. Railroad charters are not public statutes of which we can take judicial notice. We cannot judicially know that there is or is not a railroad company incorporated under the laws of Georgia known as "Atlanta & West Point Railroad and Western Railway of Alabama Company." Nor can we know judicially that there is or is not a railroad company incorporated under the laws of Alabama known as "The Western Railway of Alabama Company." Corporations are entities, artificial persons, capable of suing and being sued, and, like natural persons, have names by which they are known. When they are parties to litigation, they should be designated by their corporate name. But a slight departure would be immaterial, provided they would be readily recognized by the name used. The departure in this case is so radical-a substitution of an Alabama corporation having an expressed name for a Georgia corporation having another and distinctly different name-that we feel bound to hold that it is a change of the sole party defendant. This cannot be done, as our decisions have uniformly held. Railroad Co. v. Davis, 66 Ala. 578; Railroad Co. v. Mallon, 57 Ala. 168; Leaird v. Moore, 27 Ala. 326. The motion to strike the amended complaint from the file should have been granted.
There are probably other errors in the record, but we need not consider them. The judgment of the circuit court is reversed, and the cause remanded.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jordan v. Chicago & Alton Railway Co.
... ... 219; Railroad v. Rohrman ... (Pa.), 12 Am. & Eng. Cas., 177; Railroad v ... McCall, 89 Ala. 375; Johnson v. Railroad, 74 ... Ga. 397; Chicago v. Railroad, 89 Ind. 88. (2) The ... ...
-
Ex parte Textile Workers Union of America
... ... [30 So.2d 249] ... County against Textile Workers Union of Anniston, Alabama, ... and Vicinity, Local 204, Textile Workers Organizing Committee ... of the C. I. O., commonly ... abatement is the proper procedure. Oates v ... Clendenard, 87 Ala. 734, 6 So. 359; Western Ry. of ... Alabama v. McCall, 89 Ala. 375, 7 So. 650; Cantley v ... Moody, 7 Port. 443; 1 C.J ... ...
-
Van Landingham v. Alabama Great Southern R. Co.
... ... substitution of one corporation for another and a different ... corporation as a party defendant to the cause. The case of ... Western Ry. of Alabama v. McCall, 89 Ala. 375, 7 So ... 650, is much in point and Manistee Mill Co. v ... Hobdy, 165 Ala. 411, 51 So. 871, 138 Am.St.Rep ... ...
-
Capital Transport Co. v. Alabama Public Service Commission
...an entity is the same, and it is sued by the same name, an amendment lies to change matter descriptive of it. Cf. Western Railway of Alabama v. McCall, 89 Ala. 375, 7 So. 650. But a question of identity does exist in the instant case, and the entity to which Permit No. 20 was reissued in 19......