Rutherford v. McDonnell
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Jefferson Chancery Court. Jas. F. Robinson, Chancellor. STATEMENT BY THE COURT. The facts in this case are, briefly stated, as follows: Eliza R. Walkerwitz, a married woman, owned certain farming lands in’Jefferson county; also live stock and other personal property on said farm.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Jefferson Chancery Court. Jas. F. Robinson, Chancellor. STATEMENT BY THE COURT. The facts in this case are, briefly stated, as follows: Eliza R. Walkerwitz, a married woman, owned certain farming lands in’Jefferson county; also live stock and other personal property on said farm. She entered into a partnership with James S. Rutherford for the purpose of cultivating said lands, and sold him a half interest in the personal property for the price of $1,800. For^the payment of this, he executed his note, but has never paid the same. Afterwards, Mrs. Walkerwitz and the firm became…
1Opinion of the Court
Riddick, J.,
(after stating the facts). The appellant, Rutherford, insists in this case that Mrs. Walkerwitz had no power to sell his interest in the partnership property, and that the chancellor erred in holding that he now had no interest in such property. As the partnership of Walkerwitz & Rutherford was not formed for the purposes of trade, but to cultivate the'lands of Mrs. Walkerwitz, we concur in the contention that she could not sell the live -stock and farming utensils of the firm without the consent of Rutherford. That property was not held for the purpose of sale, and we do not…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Cayton v. HardySupreme Court of Missouri · 1858
- Lee v. OnstottSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1838
3Cited by3 opinions
- In Re MessengerDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1940
- Fields v. JarnaginSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1947
- McEuen v. WakenightSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1930