Pierce v. Wilson
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from the Dvhuque District Court. In the fail of 1852, the complainant and respondent, Wilson, entered into a business arrangement for carrying on a livery stable in the city of Dubuque. The terms of their agreement were never reduced to writing.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Dvhuque District Court. In the fail of 1852, the complainant and respondent, Wilson, entered into a business arrangement for carrying on a livery stable in the city of Dubuque. The terms of their agreement were never reduced to writing. In July, 1853, during the -absence of complainant, Wilson sold out two-thirds of the establishment to his co-defendants, David De Lorimier and Manley Hannan, excepting certain carriages and other articles specified, of which he sold but one-half. The purchasers immediately took possession, and controlled ■and used the share so purchased, and…
1Opinion of the CourtWright, C. J.
The record and argument of counsel,, present four questions for our determination: First. Is the averment in the bill, that complainant and Wilson were in partnership, sustained ? Second. If in partnership, what were the interests of the parties therein ? Third. Was the amount decreed to complainant, correct under the proof made?' Fourth. Should the property and effects of said partnership,, be held liable for any balance found due the complainant ?
The first inquiry must be answered in the affirmative.. Such partnership relation is, in fact, virtually admitted in the answers, and all of the…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Vaill v. McPhailSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1912
- Wilson v. HorrSupreme Court of Iowa · 1864
- Cox v. RussellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1876
- Lee v. American Trust & Savings Bank of LowdenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1930
- Blake v. BlakeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1862
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.