Niles v. Williams
Supreme Court of Connecticut
This was a bill in chancery, brought to the superior court for the county of Middlesex, at the February term, 1853, by Dan D. Niles, Alexander N. Niles, and Julius J. Niles, and was substantially as follows.
Read the full summary
This was a bill in chancery, brought to the superior court for the county of Middlesex, at the February term, 1853, by Dan D. Niles, Alexander N. Niles, and Julius J. Niles, and was substantially as follows. On the 13th day of April, 1846, Alfred Williams and the plaintiffs, entered into a copartnership for the manufacture of bells, of various descriptions, and other articles, and which said copartnership continued until the 13th day of December, 1848, when it was dissolved by mutual consent. It was agreed that the plaintiffs should defray one half of the expenses of prosecuting and carrying…
1Opinion of the CourtStorrs, J.
The answer of the defendant, in this case, merely traverses the fact that he was a copartner with the plaintiffs, as alleged in the bill. The superior court, on the trial of that, which was the only issue on the pleadings, after taking in the testimony on that question, found the allegation thus denied, to be true, suspended the hearing, and referred to us, for our advice, the question of the sufficiency of the bill, raised by the defendant, with a view of determining whether it is proper for that court to proceed with the further *284hearing of the case, and to take the account between the…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Maruca v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1952
- Clemmer v. Drovers' National BankIllinois Supreme Court · 1895
- Corey v. ShermanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1895
- Sherwin v. GaghagenNebraska Supreme Court · 1894
- Wooster v. Hunts Lyman Iron Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1871
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.