Page:Henry Osborn Taylor, A Treatise on the Law of Private Corporations (5th ed, 1905).djvu/144

 § 159.] THE LAW OF PRIVATE CORPORATIONS. [(JHAP. VIL § 158. It may be mentioned here that even where there is no statute forbidding the formation of corporations Right to . ° r corporate with names similar to those of corporations already in existence, 1 a corporation will be protected in the exclusive use of its name; 2 especially when its namVTlesig- nates the nature of the goods which it manufactures. 3 A cor- poration has no implied power to change its name; 1 though it would seem that a corporation may acquire a name by usage or reputation, 5 and may even have more names than one. 6 § 159. The misnomer of a corporation in contracting or pleading has an effect similar to the misnomer of an Effect of a individual. If, from the body of a written contract misnomer. ' J in which a corporation is misnamed, the corporation intended can be ascertained, the misnomer is immaterial. 7 Central Agricultural Ass'n v. Ala- bama Gold Life Ins. Co., 70 Ala. 120; see, Brown v. Atlanta Ry. Co., 113 Ga. 462. 1 See, e. g., New York Laws of 1875, chap. 611, § 4. 2 In Tennessee a petition to chan- cery for incorporation may be op- posed if the proposed name for the corporation is similar to that of an existing corporation; and the court may require the name to be modified. Ex parte Walker, 1 Teun. Ch. 97. Compare Diummond Tobacco Co. v. Handle, 114 111. 412; In re First Presbyterian Church, 111 Pa. St. 156. 3 Holmes v. Holmes M'f'g Co., 37 Conn. 278; compare Newby v. Ore- gon Cent. R. R. Co., Deady, 60'J; see §137. cinnati C. Co. v. Bate, 96 Ky. 356; nor acquire a new name by usagr. ib. Sec Reg. v. Registrar, etc., 10 Q. B. 839. But where the name of a corporation is changed by the legislature, and by its new name it is made the succes- sor of all its rights and liabilities, it may under the new name sue on a note made to it under the old name; although the note is not indorsed. 124 Trustees of Northwestern College v. Schwagler, 37 Iowa, 577. As to the right of a corporation to change its name under the New York statute of 1870, see United States Mercantile, etc., Ass'n, in re, 115 N. Y. 176; un- der the Illinois statute, see Illinois Watch Case Co. v. Pearson, 140 111. 423. Under California Statute, see Matter of La Societe Francaise d' Epargnes, 123 Cal. 525. 5 Smith v. Plank Road Co., 30 Ala. 650; Dutch West India Co. v. Van Moses, 1 Stra. 612, 614; South School District v. Blakeslee, 13 Conn. 227. 6 Minot v. Curtis, 7 Mass. 441. Knight o. Mayor of Wells, 1 Ld; Raym. 80. 7 Ryan v. Martin, 91 N. C. 464; Asheville Division v. Aston, 92 N. C. 578. See Hoboken Building Associa- tion v. Martin, 13 N. J. Eq. 427; Boisgerard v. New York Banking Co., 2 Sandf. Ch. 23; Mott v. Hicks, 1 Cowen, 513; Brockway v. Allen, 17 Wend. 40. When a deed is made to a corporation under a name varying from its true one, the corporation may sue in its true name, averring that the defendant made the deed to it under the name mentioned in the
 * Sykes v. People, 132 111. 32; Cin-