Barnard v. Lapeer & Port Huron Plank Road Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to St. Clair Circuit. This was an action of assumpsit, brought by the defendants in error upon a subscription for stock, signed by Coe, in the name of the firm of Coe & Barnard.
Read the full summary
Error to St. Clair Circuit. This was an action of assumpsit, brought by the defendants in error upon a subscription for stock, signed by Coe, in the name of the firm of Coe & Barnard. The general heading of the subscription was in these words: “Each of the undersigned agree to become a member of said Company, to pay in Ms stock as hereinunder taken, in such assessments as shall be made by the directors to be chosen, and to be bound and abide by the rules and regulations of said Company, under the law creating the same, and the General Plank Road Law, and the amendments thereto.” The defendant…
1Opinion of the Court
Martin Ch. J.:
Barnard & Coe are admitted to have been “partners in the lumbering business, owning lands in St. Clair county as such partners, and manufacturing lumber therefrom.” While such partners, Coe subscribed the name of the firm to the articles of association of the Plank Road Company, but without Barnard’s knowledge or consent. This subscription, it is claimed, made Barnard a stockholder in the Company.
No rule is better settled than that one partner can not bind his co-partner by any contract not within the immediate Scope of the partnership, unless with such co-partner’s knowledge…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Brown v. First National Bank of TempleSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
- Smith v. MosierMichigan Supreme Court · 1916
- Coleman v. ColemanHawaii Supreme Court · 1885
- Shambleau v. HoytMichigan Supreme Court · 1933
- Davis v. DodgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1874