Graser v. Stellwagen
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Supreme Court. Eeplevin for a quantity of merchandise. The answer was a general denial merely. On the.trial, the plaintiff made title to the goods under a bill of-sale, executed in the name of the mercantile firm of Wagner & Graser by Valentine Graser, one of the members, August 25, 1858, of all the personal property of the firm.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Supreme Court. Eeplevin for a quantity of merchandise. The answer was a general denial merely. On the.trial, the plaintiff made title to the goods under a bill of-sale, executed in the name of the mercantile firm of Wagner & Graser by Valentine Graser, one of the members, August 25, 1858, of all the personal property of the firm. The bill of sale was executed by Graser without the knowledge of his partner, Wagner, and without consulting him, though he was at the time in their store, where the paper was drawn, engaged in the business of the firm. On being informed thereof, on…
1Opinion of the CourtSelden, J.
It having been settled in the case of Mabbet v. White (2 Kern., 442), that a single partner has power, in the absence of fraud, notwithstanding the dissent of his co-partner, to transfer all the property of the copartnership in payment of one or more debts of such copartnership, I see no ground upon which the defence in this case can be sustained. The question of fraud, either against the copartner, or against creditors, was not available to the defendant under his answer. He merely denied the plaintiff’s title to the goods, and his own taking and conversion, or detention of them, without…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Plumb v. . Cattaraugus Co. Mutual Insurance Company.New York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Robinson v. FrostNew York Supreme Court · 1853
- Andrews v. . DurantNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
- Texier v. GouinThe Superior Court of New York City · 1856
- McCarty v. HudsonsNew York Supreme Court · 1840
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.