Stein v. LaDow
Supreme Court of Minnesota
This action was commenced in the District Court for Wa-' seca county on the IJth day of November, 1866, and on the same day garnishee summons was served on the garnishee. Judgment was entered against the defendants by defaiilt.
Read the full summary
This action was commenced in the District Court for Wa-' seca county on the IJth day of November, 1866, and on the same day garnishee summons was served on the garnishee. Judgment was entered against the defendants by defaiilt. The garnishee, in his disclosure, denied having the possession or control of any property, money or'effects of the defendants, except such as came to his possession on the 13th day of November, 1866, by virtue of a certain deed of assignment executed to him by Samuel T. Isaacs, one of the defendants. Whereupon the plaintiffs, obtaining leave of the Court therefor,…
1Opinion of the CourtBerry, J.
By the Court As to the power of one partner, without the concurrence of his co-partner, to assign the whole property of the firm to a trustee to pay the partnership debts, there is no little conflict of opinion among Courts and text writers. 1 Parsons' Contracts, 178 ; 1 Am. L. Cases, 444.
On the one hand it is said by Oh. J. Marshall, that the right of one partner to bind another in this way results from his general power over the partnership property, and that.as one partner may sell the whole property for money, or on credit, no good reason can|be given why he may not assign the whole in…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Anderson v. TompkinsU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Virginia · 1820
3Cited by6 opinions
- McDonald v. CampbellSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1905
- Coleman v. DarlingWisconsin Supreme Court · 1886
- State National Bank v. Union National BankIllinois Supreme Court · 1897
- Bowen v. ChaseU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1870
- Williams v. FrostSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1880
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.