As to the protection of a corporation in the use of its corporate name, see Moraw. Priv. Corp. § 355; TRADE-MARK.
See GOOD-WILL; PARTNERSHIP ; PARTNERS ; MISNOMER.
The real name of a party to be arrested must be inserted in the warrant, if known ; S East 828; Gurnsey v. Lovell, 9 Wend. (N. Y.) 320: if unknown, some description must be given; 1 Chitty, Cr. Law 39; with the rea son for the omission ; 1 Mood. & M. 281.
Proof may be given that the maker of an instrument habitually applied a nickname or peculiar designation used therein to a particular person or thing ; Boggs v. Taylor, 26 Ohio St. 604. As to mistakes in devises, see LEGACY. As to the use of names having the same sound, see IDEM SONANS'. As to the effect of using a name having the same derivation, see 2 Rolle, Abr. 135; Gordon v. Holiday, 1 Wash. C. C. 285, Fed. Cas. No. 5:610: At common law one could change his name ; Linton v. Bank, 10 Fed. 894; Com. v. Trainor, 123 Mass. 415 ; 3 B. & Ald. 544 ; Smith v. Casualty Co., 197 N. Y. 420, 90 N. E. 947, 26 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1167, 18 Ann. Cas. 701 (where the origin and evolution of names is discussed at length) ; but not, per haps, where one has obtained a name by judicial decree under a statute ; id. Stat utes in many states provide for a change of name. Jekyll, M. R., in 3 P. Wins. 65, de clared that any one might take upon him self as many surnames as he chose; but this judgment was reversed in 4 Bro. P. C. 194 (H. of L.), where it was said that "the individual ought to have inherited or ob tained an authority for using" a name. Fox-Davies and Carlyon-Britton on Names takes the view that no one can create a name for himself or change his name, but the power to do so is a prerogative of the crown.
The middle name is unimportant and the omission of it or its initial is of no legal ef fect ; Cox v. Durham, 128 Fed. 870, 63 C. C. A. 338; Roosevelt v. Gardinier, 2 Cow. (N. Y.) 463; Bletch v. Johnson, 40 Ill. 116; contra, Parker v. Parker, 146 Mass. 320 ; if the middle initial is given, it need not be correct even in criminal cases ; People v.
Lockwood, 6 Cal. 205; Franklin v. Talmadge, 5 Johns. (N. Y.) 84; Cox v. Durham, 128 Fed. 870, 63 C. C. A. 338; contra, King v. Clark, 7 Mo. 269; Cleveland, C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. Pierce, 34 Ind. App. 188, 72 N. E. 604; the initial letter of the first name is sufficient in a warrant ; Cox v. Durham, 128 Fed. 870, 63 C. C. A. 338.
The occasional use of a single letter as a name developed a strange contradiction. It was held that a vowel, being complete in it self, was sufficient, and a consonant, being part of a complete sound, was not ; 6 C. B. 577 ; 7 C. B. 9S0. The supposed distinction was put an end to In 15 Jur. 657, by Lord Campbell. In this country the question has been raised and two initials were held to be a valid Christian name ; Tweedy v. Jarvis, 27 Conn. 42; this has also been held in South Carolina ; City Council v. King, 4 McCord (S. C.) 487; but the contrary was held in that state in one ease; Norris v. Graves, 4 Strob. (S. C.) 32.
A mistake in the middle initial does not invalidate a process under which title to land is taken; Johnson v. Day, 2 N. D. 295 ; J. H. Burtis is taken as if J. Burtis, and is sufficient where the title was in J. F. Burtis; • Illinois C. R. Co. v. Hasenwinkle, 232 Ill. 224, 83 N. E. 815, 15 L. R. A. (N. S.) 129. A mortgage executed by Henry M. Ward as Henry N. Ward was held good where there was only one Henry Ward in the county ; Pincher v. Hanegan, 59 Ark. 151, 26 S. W. 821, 24 L. R. A. 543; but where there is a misnomer amounting to a substantial de fect, the proceedings will give no jurisdic tion; thus 0. P. Buchanan in a notice in tended for Petter 0. Buchanan was held bad ; Buchanan v. Edmiston, 1 Neb. (Unof.) 429, 95 N. W. 620; as also was P. T. B. Hopkins in a notice intended for T. P. B. Hopkins; Fanning v. Krapfl, 61 Ia. 417, 14 N. W. 727, 16 N. W. 293 ; and a publication of a summons to George H. Leslie confers no jurisdiction over George W. Leslie; D'Au tremont v. Iron Co., 104 Minn. 165, 116 N. W. 357, 17 L. R. A. (N. S.) 236, 124 Am. St. Rep. 615, 15 Ann. Cas. 114.