113 P. 97 | Idaho | 1911
This is an action to foreclose a mortgage upon certain real estate located in Twin Falls county,, this state.
The case was tried to the court, and judgment rendered in favor of the plaintiff, foreclosing said mortgage. This appeal is from the judgment.
The only question presented on this appeal is the demurrer-to the complaint. The complaint contains the following allegations : ‘ ‘ The Diamond Bank is, and was at all times herein mentioned, a corporation organized and existing under and' by virtue of the laws of the state of Missouri and engaged.
To this complaint the appellant demurs upon the ground, first, that the plaintiff has no legal capacity to sue or to bring or maintain an action, for the reason that it appears from said complaint that the plaintiff is a foreign corporation, and it does not appear that it has complied with the laws of the state of Idaho relating to foreign corporations entitling it to do business in the state of Idaho or to bring or defend actions.
In support of the demurrer it is the contention of the appellant that the allegations of the complaint show that the respondent, a foreign corporation, has failed to comply with the provisions of see. 10, art. 11 of the constitution of this state, and see. 2792 of. the Rev. Codes. It is alleged in the complaint that the plaintiff is a foreign corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the state of Missouri, and engaged in the banking business in said state and not elsewhere; that its principal place of business is at the town of Diamond in said state, and that all the transactions and business alleged in the complaint, to wit, the purchasing and assignment of the note and mortgage sought to be foreclosed, were transacted at the town of Diamond in the state of Missouri; that the plaintiff has not been engaged in any business in the state of Idaho, and has no intention of so engaging or doing business, but comes into the state for the sole and only purpose of maintaining this action.
These allegations of the complaint clearly do not bring the plaintiff within the provisions of either sec. 10, art. 11 of the constitution, or sec. 2792 of the Rev. Codes. A foreign
Judgment is affirmed. Costs awarded to the respondent.