Lamalere v. Caze
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania
This was an action for money had and received, by one partner against another, for the balance of a particular shipment, in which they were jointly interested in profit and loss;. and the proceeds, when remitted by defendant, from St. Thomas, were to be invested in another cargo, to be sent out on the same account The defence at the trial was, that 1,100 dollars, which was more than the balance of the cargo not remitted, was sent in a certain vessel, which was lost, and with…
Read the full summary
This was an action for money had and received, by one partner against another, for the balance of a particular shipment, in which they were jointly interested in profit and loss;. and the proceeds, when remitted by defendant, from St. Thomas, were to be invested in another cargo, to be sent out on the same account The defence at the trial was, that 1,100 dollars, which was more than the balance of the cargo not remitted, was sent in a certain vessel, which was lost, and with her the money. The defendant, on his arrival, being called upon by the wife of the plaintiff, gave different and…
1Opinion of the Court
BY THE COURT.
The law being admitted, there can be no doubt in this case. Even if the-evidence proved more clearly than it does, that the defendant acknowledged the balance due the plaintiff to be the 1,100 dollars, after deducting the 100 dollars, this is not a balance upon a settled account; for, to constitute such an account, all the parties must consent to it;’ all must be bound by it, or none are. This consent must be either express or implied. X am inclined to think, that if, after dissolution, one partner were to state the account, and send it to the other, who should by his conduct…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Rowland v. BoozerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1846
- Harris v. HarrisSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1859