Legal Opinion

Condon v. Callahan

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided September 15, 1905PublishedCited by 5 opinions

FROM KNOX. Appeal from tlie Chancery Court of Knox County.— Joseph W. Sneed, Chancellor.

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Wilkes

This is a hill by the executrix of M. J. Condon, deceased, to settle up the partnership that existed between M. J. Condon and the defendant Geo-. W. Callahan.

This partnership was entered into for the purpose of constructing certain railroad work, and there is no controversy about its terms, nor the proportionate interests of the parties thereunder.

The partnership entered into an important and very expensive contract for railroad construction around Keo-gan Tunnel, near Harriman, Tenn. Soon after the work was commenced M. J. Condon was killed, and the work was carried on and the contract was…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Gilmore v. . HamNew York Court of Appeals · 1894
  2. Griggs v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863
  3. Maynard v. RichardsIllinois Supreme Court · 1897
  4. Schenkl v. DanaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875
  5. Godfrey v. TempletonTennessee Supreme Court · 1887

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Bracht v. ConnellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
  2. Prows v. HawleyUtah Supreme Court · 1928
  3. Ruggles v. BuckleyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1910
  4. Harrah v. DyerIndiana Supreme Court · 1913
  5. Caughy v. HearnCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1930

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API