Legal Opinion

Gillett v. Hall

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided June 15, 1840PublishedCited by 9 opinions

This was a bill in chancery for an account. The original bill, brought in October, 1837, stated, That on the 24th of July, 1835, Frederick P. Hall, Edward Seymour, Edward Sexton, and Anson Williams, entered into a co-partnership with the plaintiff, by which it was agreed between them, viz. by the plaintiff on the one part, and said Hall and others, on the other part, that the plaintiff and said Hall should go to the state of Alabama, and there receive brass and wood clocks…

Read the full summary

This was a bill in chancery for an account. The original bill, brought in October, 1837, stated, That on the 24th of July, 1835, Frederick P. Hall, Edward Seymour, Edward Sexton, and Anson Williams, entered into a co-partnership with the plaintiff, by which it was agreed between them, viz. by the plaintiff on the one part, and said Hall and others, on the other part, that the plaintiff and said Hall should go to the state of Alabama, and there receive brass and wood clocks and other property, to be forwarded to them, by the other partners, to be sold in that state ; that such co-partnership…

1Opinion of the CourtChurch, J.

The defendants claim, that there are only two parties to this bill; and therefore, as it is a bill for an account, the only remedy is at law.

It has long been holden, by this court, that no action at law will lie in this state, for the settlement of a co-partnership account, where the number of co-partners exceeds two. Beach v. Hotchkiss, 2 Conn. Rep. 425. 430. But we are not informed, nor persuaded, that it necessarily follows, or has ever been decided, either by our courts or elsewhere, that the only remedy in such cases, is at law, where there are no more than two partners. Nor is it…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Sigourney v. MunnSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1828
  2. Beach v. HotchkissSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1818
  3. Thorn v. GermandNew York Court of Chancery · 1820
  4. Shephard v. MerrilNew York Court of Chancery · 1818

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Weidlich v. WeidlichSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1960
  2. Garrett v. Morris & Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1898
  3. Straughan v. HallwoodWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1887
  4. Tillar v. CookSupreme Court of Virginia · 1883
  5. Tunesma v. SchuttlerIllinois Supreme Court · 1885

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API