State ex rel. Taylor v. Woods
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to the Saline Circuit Court. The law does not require that a demand against a partnership estate administered by a surviving partner should be allowed against such estate by the county court; nor is such allowance necessary in order to maintain an action on the bond of such surviving partner.
Read the full summary
Error to the Saline Circuit Court. The law does not require that a demand against a partnership estate administered by a surviving partner should be allowed against such estate by the county court; nor is such allowance necessary in order to maintain an action on the bond of such surviving partner. (Bredell v. Baldwin, 27 Mo. 106.) The supervisory control which a county court has over a surviving partner administering a partnership estate is statutory merely; no authority of the kind was exercised over him at common law by courts of equity. He, being the owner of one half the partnership…
1Opinion of the CourtLovelace, Judge
This case having been disposed of on demurrer in the court below, the question to be determined is whether the plaintiff states sufficient facts in her petition to constitute a cause of action. The petition shows the execution of a promissory note for one hundred and thirty-one dollars and *77twenty-five cents, by J. H. '& W. C. Woods, a firm composed of James H. Woods and William C. Woods ; that said note was executed sometime in the year 1860, and was payable on or before the 25th day of December, 1860, with interest from maturity at the rate of ten per cent, per annum; that there was a credit…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Easton v. CourtwrightSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
- Denny v. TurnerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1876
- State ex rel. Gibson v. MyersMissouri Court of Appeals · 1880