Legal Opinion

Bremen Saving Bank v. Branch-Crookes Saw Co.

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided April 15, 1891PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon** Daniel Dillon, Judge.- (1) Under the agreement read in evidence, Schulte and Fosburg were not partners in the firm of Branch,, Crookes & Co. in any sense of the term.

Read the full summary

Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon** Daniel Dillon, Judge.- (1) Under the agreement read in evidence, Schulte and Fosburg were not partners in the firm of Branch,, Crookes & Co. in any sense of the term. Clifton v, Howard, 89 Mo. 192; Ashby v. Shaw, 82 Mo. 76. (2) Even if the interest of Schulte and Fosburg in the net profits be considered as constituting them partners, the bank, as bona fide holders for value before maturity, had a perfect title to the note, and it was, as to them, a valid and binding indebtedness of Branch, Crookes & .Co. Edwards v. Thomas, 66 Mo. 468, and cas.…

1Opinion of the CourtThomas, J.

— This is a suit at law on a promissory note, dated October 10, 1887, signed by the Branch-Crookes Saw Company as maker, and Joseph W. Branch as indorser, for $6,500.

The corporation defends the suit on the ground that it is a business corporation, organized under the provision of our statute relating to.manufacturing and *430business companies; that its name was employed by .Joseph W. Branch, the then president of the corporation, in signing said note for his own accommodation; that it was so signed by him for the purpose of paying or satisfying an individual, antecedent obligation of his own,…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Supervisors v. SchenckSupreme Court of the United States · 1867
  2. Crawford v. SpencerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1887
  3. National Park Bank v. German-American Mutual Warehousing & Security Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1889
  4. Edwards v. ThomasSupreme Court of Missouri · 1877
  5. Fitzgerald v. BarkerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1888

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Ess v. GriffithSupreme Court of Missouri · 1897
  2. Sanders v. ChartrandSupreme Court of Missouri · 1900
  3. Acorn Lumber Co. v. Friedlander Box Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1926
  4. Curtis, Jones & Co. v. Smelter National BankSupreme Court of Colorado · 1908
  5. Gage v. AverillMissouri Court of Appeals · 1894

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

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

Powered by the Exa API