Bank of New Orleans v. . Matthews
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the first judicial department, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff, entered upon a verdict. These actions are brought against defendants as members of the firm of Brander, Chambliss & Co., upon promissory-notes indorsed by said firm and discounted by plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the first judicial department, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff, entered upon a verdict. These actions are brought against defendants as members of the firm of Brander, Chambliss & Co., upon promissory-notes indorsed by said firm and discounted by plaintiff. On the 27th March, 1861, the firm of Brander, Chambliss & Co. was formed by authentic or notarial act, consisting of James S. Brander, Jr., Samuel L. Chambliss and Edward Matthews as general partners, and James S. Brander, Sr., being named in said act as partner…
1Opinion of the CourtPeckham, J.
The defendant, Matthews, who alone defends, insists that the partnership formed on the 27th day of March, 1861, by the defendants, to be void in case Bradner, Sr., then in Nassau, a proposed partner in commendam, refused to assent, became void by his refusal to give such consent, and that the contract of copartnership thereby became utterly void. But in fact the partnership did continue, though it might have been closed at once under that provision. It was not terminated in fact, as the evidence plainly shows.
There is some ground for holding that the notice of the dissolution of the firm,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Mrs. Alexander's CottonSupreme Court of the United States · 1865
- Kershaw v. KelseyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
- Woods v. . WilderNew York Court of Appeals · 1870
3Cited by1 opinion
- Hubbard v. . MatthewsNew York Court of Appeals · 1873