Newland v. Rogers
New York Court of Chancery
This was an appeal from a decretal order of the late vice chancellor of the third circuit, overruling the demurrer of the defendant to the bill of complaint in this case. The bill stated that in 1836 the complainant and the defendant commenced the business of buying and selling spars, ship timber, and other lumber for the New-York and other markets, on joint account, and to share equally in the profits and ioss.
Read the full summary
This was an appeal from a decretal order of the late vice chancellor of the third circuit, overruling the demurrer of the defendant to the bill of complaint in this case. The bill stated that in 1836 the complainant and the defendant commenced the business of buying and selling spars, ship timber, and other lumber for the New-York and other markets, on joint account, and to share equally in the profits and ioss. Several quantities of lumber were purchased and sold, on some of which there was a profit and on some a loss, and that something was lost by bad debts; that in 1837 the parties had a…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
There does not appear to be any necessary connection between the business of purchasing standing timber, and timber lands and timber to be floated down the Susquehannah, in the state of Pennsylvania, by the parties to this suit, which business was carried on through their agent Patchin, and the business of buying and selling lumber for the New-York market, which was carried on by the parties themselves, or by the complainant for himself and Rogers, in this state. Nor is the giving of the two notes, as stated in the bill, necessarily connected with either of the other…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Tucker v. TuckerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1860
- Security Savings & Loan Ass'n v. BuchananCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1895
- New York Central & Hudson River Railroad v. ReevesNew York Supreme Court · 1903