Also known as: oppignorates · oppignorated · oppignorating · oppignoration · pledge · pawn
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
An archaic verb describing the act of pawning or pledging property as security for a debt or other obligation.
Odette Orozco, a public school student, was required by her principal to oppignorate her bicycle as security for a debt each morning or face expulsion. She refused on religious grounds and was suspended. The court held that the requirement violated the First Amendment because the state cannot compel expression of patriotic orthodoxy.
Olympus Banking oppignorated substantially all of its real estate holdings to secure a line of credit from a lender. No shareholder vote was taken. The transaction was upheld because the model act permits a corporation to encumber its assets without shareholder approval regardless of whether the action occurs in the usual course of business.
Oakridge Manufacturing oppignorated a factory and equipment to obtain financing for expansion. The board acted without amending the articles. The pledge was valid because the model act expressly grants every corporation the power to mortgage or pledge any part of its property.
Orchard Farms oppignorated its entire stock interest in a supplier corporation to secure a loan. The board approved the pledge without shareholder consent. The action was authorized because the model act permits a corporation to pledge shares or other interests in any other entity.
Odyssey Logistics oppignorated its accounts receivable and equipment to guarantee repayment of newly issued bonds. The board authorized the pledge as part of the financing package. The transaction was proper because the model act allows a corporation to secure its obligations by pledge of any of its property or income.
Opal Okoro applied for a permit to oppignorate laundry equipment as collateral for a business loan. City officials denied the permit under an ordinance enforced only against operators of Chinese ancestry. The court invalidated the denial because the selective enforcement violated equal protection.
Yick Wo and Wo Lee were Chinese subjects operating laundries in San Francisco. Both petitioners complied with every requisite deemed necessary by law or public officers for the protection of neighboring property from fire and against injury to the public health. The ordinances of the supervisors of the county and city of San Francisco conferred upon the supervisors a naked and arbitrary power to grant or withhold consent without reference to the personal character or qualifications of applicants or the adaptation of the buildings. They did not point to a regulation of the business of keeping and conducting laundries with a view to protection against fire. Applications for consent submitted by Yick Wo, Wo Lee, and more than two hundred other Chinese subjects were denied by the supervisors. At the same time, eighty individuals who were not Chinese subjects received permission to carry on the same business under similar conditions. Yick Wo was convicted and imprisoned for violating the ordinances. His case was brought to the Supreme Court of the United States by writ of error from the Supreme Court of California. Wo Lee's parallel case advanced through the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of California. The matters reached the Supreme Court of the United States for review of federal questions arising under the Constitution and treaties.
View caseThe term is an archaic verb that means to pawn or pledge property as security for a debt or obligation. Contemporary statutes and cases use the words pledge or mortgage instead.
Under the Model Business Corporation Act, shareholder approval is not required for a corporation to mortgage, pledge, or otherwise encumber its assets, whether or not the transaction occurs in the usual course of business.
A defendant who takes goods intending to sell them back to the owner or to pledge them as security has the intent required for larceny because the conduct is the substantial equivalent of a permanent loss or creates a high risk of permanent loss.
…a building block of our national community. For that reason, just as a couple vows to support each other, so does society pledge to support the couple, offering symbolic recognition and material benefits to protect and nourish the union. Indeed, while the States are in general free to vary the benefits they confer on…