Legal Opinion

American Linen Thread Company v. . Wortendyke

New York Court of Appeals

Decided June 5, 1862PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Action iii the Suprerhe Court bn a '"note for 'S808.'04, made May 9,1859, !by “ Wdrteadylce ¡Bros. ■& Co." to the ordfer‘"tif -the plaintiffs,"-‘six "months 'from date. Defence, that the’defendant, David D. A. "Wortendyke,"was not a partner -of 'the firm who were 'the makers. -The evidence showed that fie- was mot ’in -fact 'such 'paAne-r-; 'but the 'plaintiffs -claimed that be Was, nevertheless, liable to them upon "the note, finder the lawof partnership.

Read the full summary

Action iii the Suprerhe Court bn a '"note for 'S808.'04, made May 9,1859, !by “ Wdrteadylce ¡Bros. ■& Co." to the ordfer‘"tif -the plaintiffs,"-‘six "months 'from date. Defence, that the’defendant, David D. A. "Wortendyke,"was not a partner -of 'the firm who were 'the makers. -The evidence showed that fie- was mot ’in -fact 'such 'paAne-r-; 'but the 'plaintiffs -claimed that be Was, nevertheless, liable to them upon "the note, finder the lawof partnership. It-appearedthat, for sometime prior to Septeriiber 1,1858, "three brothers, the -defendants, ©avid ©. A., Isaac, and John B. Wortendyke,…

1Opinion of the Court

Dentó, J.

The defendant’s counsel .insists that the new dealing, which- formed the consideration of the note sued on, was not with the firm with which the plaintiffs had previously dealt; and that the rule requiring notice, in order .to protect a- former partner who had .ceased to be interested, .does, not apply. This argument is not satisfactory; for in every case where a partner has withdrawn, and there is a further dealing with the remaining partners, under such circumstances as to leave the retiring partner responsible, the contract is not between the creditor and the former firm, but it…

2Cited by8 opinions

  1. Cemetery Ass'n v. MeningerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1875
  2. Claflin v. . LenheimNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
  3. Masters v. McHollandSupreme Court of Kansas · 1873
  4. Frankel v. WathenNew York Supreme Court · 1890
  5. Gibbs v. HumphreyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1895

3 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