53 Minn. 370 | Minn. | 1893
This appeal presents no question of any merit.
The action was to recover money loaned to the defendant corporation, and to enforce the individual liability of the defendant stockholders therefor.
Neither is it material whether the officer who procured the loan had authority to do so or not. By retaining the money and appropriating it to its own use, the company has ratified the transaction.
It is equally unimportant that the inducement to plaintiff to make the loan might have been the provisions of the contract between her husband and certain stockholders and officers of the company, looking to a transfer to him of a controlling interest in its stock, etc.
Order affirmed.
(Opinion published 55 N. W. Rep. 550.)