Legal Opinion

Huff v. Lutz

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1882No. 9869PublishedCited by 4 opinions

From the Hamilton Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the Court

Bicknell, C. C.

The appellee in his complaint alleged that he and George Sperry were partners in a flouring-mill; that he, as surviving partner, under the order of the Delaware Circuit Court, converted the assets of the partnership into money; that the debts of the firm exceeded the amount realized from the assets by $1,394.46; that he has paid all of said debts except $1,404.62, and has only $10.16 left of the proceeds of said assets; that of said $1,394.46 each partner ought to pay one-half; that he has assumed to pay and has secured all of said $1,404.62, and that the creditors of the firm…

Also in this document: Per curiam.

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Bake v. SmileyIndiana Supreme Court · 1882
  2. Weyer v. ThornburghIndiana Supreme Court · 1860
  3. Hardy v. MitchellIndiana Supreme Court · 1879
  4. Bond v. NaveIndiana Supreme Court · 1878
  5. Olleman v. Reagan's AdministratorIndiana Supreme Court · 1867

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Talbott v. EmmonsIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
  2. American Bonding Co. v. State ex rel. WhislerIndiana Court of Appeals · 1907
  3. Beste v. BurgerNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1885
  4. Beckett v. LittleIndiana Court of Appeals · 1899

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

Powered by the Exa API