Bowman v. Bailey
Supreme Court of Vermont
This was an action of book account, brought in the County Court, and judgment to account having been rendered therein, an auditor was appointed, who reported ; — that in the spring of the year 1835, two of the plaintiffs, viz.
Read the full summary
This was an action of book account, brought in the County Court, and judgment to account having been rendered therein, an auditor was appointed, who reported ; — that in the spring of the year 1835, two of the plaintiffs, viz. Bowman and Hodgson, and one Jeremiah Hall, were owners of a canal boat, each owning one third; that the boat being out of repair, Bowman and Hodgson repaired it, at their own expense, and made a contract with the plaintiff, Cummings, to sail said boat during the season of that year, by the terms of which the said Cummings was to pay all the necessary expenses of sailing…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Phelps, J.
The plaintiffs cannot be considered as part*172ners, strictly speaking. They did not share in the profits and loss of the business, in the sense in which the terms are usec* as constituting the criterion of partnership. The terms, when used in reference to this subject, denote the ultimate profjt Or loss of the operation. Here the plaintiffs were to divide the gross earnings of the boat, without reference to the usual and customary expenditures. Such a connection has been repeatedly held not to constitute a partnership. They were indeed to share…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Beecher v. BushMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
- Setzer v. BealeWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1882
- Farmers' Exchange v. BrownSupreme Court of Vermont · 1934
- Parchen v. AndersonMontana Supreme Court · 1885
- Duryea v. WhitcombSupreme Court of Vermont · 1858
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.