Legal Opinion

Pritchett v. Thomas Plater & Co.

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided December 15, 1920Published

FROM DAVIDSON Appeal from the Chancery Court of Davidson County —Hon. John T. Lellyett, Chancellor.

1Opinion

ÜN PETITION EOE REHEARING.

This cause is before us upon the complainant’s petition to rehear on four questions, viz.:

1. What was the effect of the defendant company’s knowledge of Samuel Pritchett’s insanity at the time the sale of the stock in question was made?

2. Were Pritchett and Stockell agents for each other and their firm during the existence of the partnership and Pritchett’s insanity?

3. Did Stockell assume and undertake to act as partner in making the sale, and did the defendant company deal with him as partner in that transaction 2

4. Did Stockell have the power, merely as partner,…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Halstead v. ShepardSupreme Court of Alabama · 1853
  2. Campbell v. DentSupreme Court of Missouri · 1873
  3. Graser v. . StellwagenNew York Court of Appeals · 1862
  4. Pahlman v. TaylorIllinois Supreme Court · 1874
  5. Schneider & Davis v. SansomTexas Supreme Court · 1884

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API