Cummings v. Mills
New York Court of Common Pleas
Appeal by the plaintiff from a judgment of the Special Term, dismissing tbe complaint. The defendants were the inventors of an improvement in machines for pulverizing quartz, for which they had obtained •a .patent.
Read the full summary
Appeal by the plaintiff from a judgment of the Special Term, dismissing tbe complaint. The defendants were the inventors of an improvement in machines for pulverizing quartz, for which they had obtained •a .patent. They sold to the plaintiff one-fourth of their interest in the patent right, and an agreement in the name of the three was entered into, which was signed by the plaintiff and Samuel Mills only, and which-recited that it was mutually agreed that they should build one machine or more for the purpose of working the same or for sale; that the plaintiff was to furnish the money for…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
Daly, F. J.
There was nothing in the agreement between the parties to this suit creating a • co-partnership. To constitute a partnership inter se, there must be an agreement to share in the losses as well as in the profits, and there is nothing upon the face of this agreement from which it can be implied that the defendants were to bear any losses, The plaintiff was to pay for the building of the machine, for which he was to be repaid from the receipts derived ■ by the working or sale of it. If nothing were derived, he had to bear the loss incurred by this outlay, for there is…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Rogers v. Hosack's ExecutorsNew York Supreme Court · 1837
3Cited by1 opinion
- Pattison v. . BlanchardNew York Court of Appeals · 1851