upr000196 88

\ I ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION LAS VEGAS LAND ® WATER CO Los An geles, Jan.16,1917 Mr. A* S. H alsted, Bldg. Dear S ir : I note Mr. W aters’ in q u iry as to the lim it a ­tio n s o f the A r t ic le s o f In corp ora tion o f Las Vegas Land & Water Company, which I am retu rn in g you herew ith. The f i r s t , second and th ir d su b d ivision s o f paragraph 3 r e c it in g the o b jects and purposes o f the co rp o ra tio n , would seem to lim it the a c q u is itio n and s a le o f land, w ater, power, e t c . , to the S tate o f Nev­ada. The governing sta tu tes o f Nevada, namely, s e c tio n 7 o f paragraph 9 o f the a ct o f 1903, in fo rc e at the time o f the in co rp o ra tio n , enumerating the powers, among oth er things provides that i t may buy or otherw ise ob ta in , hold, purchase, mortgage and convey, r e a l and personal property w ith in or out o f the s t a te , and conduct business in any o f the s ta te s o r t e r r i t o r i e s , or the D is­t r i c t o f Columbia,, or the dependencies and co lo n ie s o f the United S ta te s . This s ta tu te I think would c o n tro l were i t not fo r paragraph 9 o f s e c tio n 4 o f the same a c t, which provides th at the c e r t i f i c a t e o f in co rp o ra tio n may a ls o con tain any p r o v i s i o n ..................... lim it in g and reg u la tin g the powers o f the c o r p o r a t io n ........ ....................provided such p ro visio n s are not con trary to the laws o f th is state., This l a t t e r p ro v is io n , in my judgment, would make the ac­q u is itio n o f land in any s ta te oth er than Nevada ULTRA VIRES I do not b e lie v e , however, th at any person other than the S tate o f C a lifo r n ia c o u ld ,r a is e the qu estion as to the v a l i d i t y o f the t i t l e acquired by th is Company in C a lifo r n ia , but th a t any attack'w ou ld have to be by a d ir e c t proceeding and not in any c o lla t e r a l way. The corp ora tion a ct Of Nevada o f 1903, as amended in 1913, provides a sim ple, inexpen sive method o f amendment o f the a r t i c l e s , and I would advise th a t the f i r s t , second „and th ird paragraphs o f s e c tio n 3 c o verin g the ob jects and purposes o f the co rp o ra tio n , be amended so as to s ta te f u l l y that the Company is au th orized to tran sact business in th is S ta te , oth er s ta te s , the D is t r ic t o f Columbia, and the t e r r i t o r ie s , d i s t r i c t s , dependencies and co lo n ies o f the United S ta te s , and in fo r e ig n co u n tries. Or, in other words, have i t as broad as the governing s ta tu te .