King v. Leighton
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, entered upon, the report of a referee. The parties were, in October, 1870, copartners in the business-of building and erecting iron bridges, &c. The plaintiff furnished the shops, buildings, steam-engines, machinery and tools, known as King’s Iron Works, at Buffalo, and the steam power necessary to-' drive the said machinery, as his part of the capital. The defendant furnished the cash capital.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, entered upon, the report of a referee. The parties were, in October, 1870, copartners in the business-of building and erecting iron bridges, &c. The plaintiff furnished the shops, buildings, steam-engines, machinery and tools, known as King’s Iron Works, at Buffalo, and the steam power necessary to-' drive the said machinery, as his part of the capital. The defendant furnished the cash capital. The plaintiff became insolvent, and was adjudged a bankrupt July 19, 1872. Thereafter his assignee demanded a settlement by the defendant of the…
1Opinion of the Court
JIaedin, J.:
I think the evidence sufficient to uphold the finding of fact made by the referee, that the defendant falsely stated that the profits did not exceed about $19,000, and that the plaintiff relied thereon, whereas in truth the profits exceeded $49,000. It may be conceded that the plaintiff might, at the time he accounted with the defendant on the basis of $19,000 profits, have ascertained the actual situation of the accounts. Yet the defendant ought to have made time statements if he made any, and if he assumed to know what the profits actually were. The plaintiff was justified in…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Mead v. . BunnNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
- Collender v. . PhelanNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
- Clark v. RankinNew York Supreme Court · 1866