Court : US Supreme Court
..... court, a bill was filed by john law, william h. law, lucius h. scott, and hugh stewart, in their own right, and also the trustees of the boston land company. the nature of the bill and the proceedings under it are stated in the opinion of the court, as are also the proceedings in the ejectment which gave rise to ..... defendants, plaintiffs here, were nonresidents of the state, and neither appeared, nor were served personally with process. as to them, the proceedings were purely in rem, and the decree acted only upon the res or subject matter. and as to the subject matter, the bill on its face shows, that these two plaintiffs had no interest in or connection with ..... to conclude the rights of the absent party, only as it respects property, whether real or personal, involved in the suit, the property of the party proceeded against. they act upon the thing, and bind the party in respect to it. now that in this case, so far as the two nonresident defendants were concerned, was their interest in the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... supreme court of the territory of dakota syllabus the grant by the act of congress of july 2, 1864, to the northern pacific railroad company of lands to which the indian title had not been extinguished operated to convey the fee to the company, subject to the right of occupancy by the indians. the manner, time, and conditions of extinguishing such right of occupancy were ..... mails, troops, munitions of war, and public stores over the route of said line of railway, every alternate section of public land, not mineral, designated by odd numbers, to the amount of twenty alternate sections per mile, on each side of said railroad line, as said company may adopt, through the territories of the united states, and ten alternate sections of land .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... defendants' company gives no authority respecting the bills in parliament promoted by the plaintiffs, and we are ..... , to a small extent, have been frequently done since the establishment of railways; but unless the acts so done can be proved to be in conformity with the powers given by the special acts of parliament under which those acts are done, they furnish no authority whatever. in east anglian railway company v. eastern counties railway company, 11 c.b. 803, the court said the statute incorporating the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... which contains the following guarantee: "whereas hiram clearwater, of the city of cincinnati, on the 6th of may, 1853, contracted with the cincinnati, cambridge & chicago short line railway company for the sale of a tract of land situate in wayne county, indiana, lying on the national road about four miles east of cambridge city and adjoining the lands of ..... not voluntarily appearing to answer." in the case of railroad bank of vicksburg v. slocomb, 14 pet. 65, it is said the 11th section of the judiciary act declares that no civil suit shall be brought before either of said courts against an inhabitant of the united states by any original process in any other district than ..... such judgment or decree shall not prejudice other parties not served with process, or who do not voluntarily appear. now it is too clear for controversy that the act of 1839 did intend to change the character of the parties to the suit. the plaintiff may sue in the circuit court any part of the defendants, although .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... passed was considered defective. jervis, ch.b., in delivering the judgment of the court, observed: "we may now take it for granted that the dealings with these companies are not like dealings with other partnerships, and that the parties dealing with them are bound to read the statute and the deed of settlement. but they are not bound ..... two hundred thousand dollars, by the said knox county, to the capital stock &c.;, by order of the board of commissioners," in pursuance of the third section of act &c.;, passed by the general assembly of the state of indiana and approved 15 january, 1849. the purchaser was not bound to look further for evidence of a ..... or omission in these notices had the effect to deprive the board of this authority, or rather furnish evidence that the power had never vested in it under the act, and further, that the plaintiffs are chargeable with a knowledge of all substantial defects or irregularities in these notices of the election, and not therefore entitled to the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... affairs to a meeting of the stockholders. in the year 1851 a general law relating to railway companies empowered them "at any time, by means of their subscription to the capital stock of any other company, or otherwise, to aid such company in the construction of its railroad, for the purpose of forming a connection of said last- ..... and his associate. this transaction was reported to the stockholders of the endorsing corporations in july, 1854, and accepted by them as the act of the company. the board of directors of the cleveland company, on the 16th june, resolved that there should be submitted to a vote of the stockholders, at a meeting on the 1st july ..... the resolution sanctioning this contract has not been rescinded. it may be that among the stockholders and within the corporation the cause of this procrastination and hesitancy to act upon the subject may be estimated properly. but we are to regard the conduct of the corporation from an external position. the community at large must form .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... , called for the exercise of a power by which different lines of road could be united. accordingly, on the 23d february, 1853, the general assembly of indiana passed an act allowing any railway company that had been organized, to intersect and unite their road with any other road constructed or in progress of construction, and to merge and consolidate their stock, and on ..... passed may 11, 1852, for the incorporation of railroads, the cincinnati, cambridge & chicago short line railway company -- frequently entitled throughout the case, for brevity, "the short line railway" -- was created and made a "corporation" in that state. [ footnote 1 ] this act contained no provision by which any railroad company incorporated under it could consolidate its stock with the stock of any other corporation. in february .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... this instrument, the governor and auditor acted officially, and not personally, and in our judgment the deed was sufficient to pass the title of the state they represented. and it may be stated generally that when ..... the governor and auditor in virtue of the power vested in them by the acts and joint resolution convey the property sold, "being all the right, title, interest, claim and demand which the state" held or possessed therein. in the execution of ..... of the purchasers of the property, of the other part, but it shows a completed transaction between the state and the grantee named. it refers to the acts of the legislature authorizing the sale; it sets forth a sale made pursuant to their provisions; it mentions the joint resolution affirming the sale; and it declares that .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... . there is no doubt but that every part of this transaction was within the competency of the city council, on the one side, and the railroad company on the other, as derived from the act of the legislature of ohio, already referred to, of the 20th march, 1850, and was valid and binding upon both the parties. the seventh section ..... march, 1850, and that page 70 u. s. 280 neither the 13th section of the general law incorporating railroads, nor the 16th clause of the act of february, 1851, incorporating the cincinnati western railroad company, and which required a pledge of the private property of the stockholders applied to the case -- decreed that the city had no lien whatever on ..... to the issue of bonds to the amount of $600,000 of the city, to be secured by a mortgage upon such property of the company as the city council should require. the seventh section of this act of 1850 provided, in substance, as follows: "that it shall be the duty of the said city council, and it is hereby authorized .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... all its laws; and, therefore, the circuit court could take judicial notice of this law. by the law of ohio passed december 15, 1852, any railroad company authorized to borrow money and execute bonds or promissory notes therefor was authorized to sell such bonds or notes at such times and in such places, either within or ..... substance of which was that the bonds declared on were, as alleged in the pleas, originally negotiated by the defendant below to the ohio life insurance & trust company at its office in cincinnati, ohio, at par, being parcel of one hundred and twenty-five bonds negotiated together; that the defendant proposed to sell the bonds to ..... s. 229 deem most advantageous to the road; and finally, that by a second statute of the same state, the junction railroad company was made a corporation of ohio and authorized to perform any act as if originally incorporated therein. mr. justice bradley delivered the opinion of the court. unless this case has become embarrassed by the pleadings .....
Tag this Judgment!