Abbot v. Johnson
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Bill in Equity. The complainants, Abbot and Hunt, state in their bill substantially as follows : In the summer of 1889 it was proposed by sundry individuals to form a partnership, or joint stock company, for the purpose of carrying on a retail trade at Bath Lower Village, in domestic and foreign goods, and, to carry this purpose into effect, proposals were drawn up and signed by the plaintiffs and by the defendant, to the number of about fifty.
Read the full summary
Bill in Equity. The complainants, Abbot and Hunt, state in their bill substantially as follows : In the summer of 1889 it was proposed by sundry individuals to form a partnership, or joint stock company, for the purpose of carrying on a retail trade at Bath Lower Village, in domestic and foreign goods, and, to carry this purpose into effect, proposals were drawn up and signed by the plaintiffs and by the defendant, to the number of about fifty. By these written articles the subscribers agreed to become partners in a firm to be styled the “ Farmers’ and Mechanics’ Store,” and to pay in the…
1Opinion of the CourtPerley, C. J.
It has been decided on the demurrer that the complainants, in their bill, state a case which entitles them to relief. The answers very fully admit the general arrangement alleged to have been made between the defendants and Atkins & Stedman, by which the plaintiffs were sued in the action at law, and charged as partners in the firm of the Farmers’ and Mechanics’ Company, and that the execution, which was issued on the judgment recovered in that suit, was levied on their property, and in part paid by them. They also admit that the original contract of partnership, signed by the plaintiffs, was…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Masson v. BovetCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1845
- Trustees of Watertown v. Cowen & BaggNew York Court of Chancery · 1834
- Robinson v. SmithNew York Court of Chancery · 1831
- Varick v. Smith & The Attorney GeneralNew York Court of Chancery · 1835
- Boyd & Suydam v. Hoyt & ParselNew York Court of Chancery · 1835
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Winsor v. BaileySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1875
- Free v. BuckinghamSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1876