Burns v. Rosenstein
Supreme Court of the United States
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. .In In equity. The case as stated-by the court was as follows: Bosenstein Bros, (composed of the appellees Julius W. Bosenstein and Leo Bosenstein) and Henry Sellman, of New York, and J. J. Burns & Co., (composed of Joseph J. Burns and Bobert Tarr,) formed a partnership in the business of canning fish, more particularly mackerel, and manufacturing pomace, or fish guano, to be conducted…
Read the full summary
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. .In In equity. The case as stated-by the court was as follows: Bosenstein Bros, (composed of the appellees Julius W. Bosenstein and Leo Bosenstein) and Henry Sellman, of New York, and J. J. Burns & Co., (composed of Joseph J. Burns and Bobert Tarr,) formed a partnership in the business of canning fish, more particularly mackerel, and manufacturing pomace, or fish guano, to be conducted under the name of the Union Fish Company, on premises owned and occupied by' Burns & Co... at Gloucester, Massachusetts. It…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Hablan
The special master reported that there was no sufficient evidence to establish misconduct or negligence upon the part either of the plaintiffs or of the defendants. This report having beeh confirmed, it is assigned for error «that the court below did not dismiss the bill; and, that if a case was made for the dissolution of the partnership, it was error to proceed in the distribution of the assets without decreeing such dissolution. The consent of the defendants to a dissolution of the partnership, as shown by their answer, made it unnecessary for the plaintiffs to make proof of the special…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Trustees v. GreenoughSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Story v. LivingstonSupreme Court of the United States · 1839
- Medsker v. BonebrakeSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Brockett v. BrockettSupreme Court of the United States · 1845
3Cited by14 opinions
- Central Improvement Co. v. Cambria Steel Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1913
- Handy v. AdamsCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1897
- Lane v. RushmoreNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1938
- Nutter v. BrownWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1905
- Tutson v. HollandCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1931
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.