Hannaman v. Karrick
Utah Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the district court of the third district, and from an order refusing a new trial, Hon. Charles S. Zane, judge. ' The opinion states the facts.
1Opinion of the Court
Baktoh, J.:
This is an action for the dissolution of a partnership, brought by one partner against his copartner. The case was referred to a referee with power to try the same and report a' decree. The referee tried the case and made his report, which was confirmed by the court. The defendant thereupon moved for a new trial, which motion having been overruled, he prosecuted his appeal in this court.
It appears from the record that the plaintifil and defendant entered into an agreement of copartnership on the 8d day of February, 1886, for a term of five years from that date, to carry on a…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Skinner v. DaytonNew York Supreme Court · 1822
- Solomon v. KirkwoodMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
- Gerard v. GateauIllinois Supreme Court · 1876
- Henn v. WalshNew York Court of Chancery · 1833
- Cash v. EarnshawIllinois Supreme Court · 1872
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Karrick v. HannamanSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Platt v. HendersonOregon Supreme Court · 1961
- Dwyer v. Salt Lake City Copper Manufacturing Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1896
- Larsen v. OnesiteUtah Supreme Court · 1899
- Short & Randall v. PierceUtah Supreme Court · 1895
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.