Jaffe v. Krum
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from 81. Louis Court of Appeals, (1) Revised Statutes, section 3409, clearly refers to tlie advancement of the limited partner as capital, and not such loans as he may make outside of his advancements as a limited partner. Clapp v. Lacey, 35 Conn. 463. (2) The statute is in aid of commerce and should receive a liberal construction.
Read the full summary
Appeal from 81. Louis Court of Appeals, (1) Revised Statutes, section 3409, clearly refers to tlie advancement of the limited partner as capital, and not such loans as he may make outside of his advancements as a limited partner. Clapp v. Lacey, 35 Conn. 463. (2) The statute is in aid of commerce and should receive a liberal construction. (3) It is of the very essence of limited partnership that the special partner by complying with the law risks nothing but the capital advanced. The attitude occupied by the special partner towards the business more nearly resembles the position at common law…
1Opinion of the CourtBua.ck, J.
The agreed facts show that O. M. Jaffe and William Robertson made a limited partnership under the statute of this state, the business to be conducted under the name of William Robertson, Jaffe being the special partner. All the statutory pre-requisites were complied with. The special partner thereafter advanced to the firm $15,503.98 as a loan, having previously paid in his entire contribution, as agreed upon in the written partnership agreement. Thereafter the partnership became insolvent, and Robinson, for the firm, made a deed of voluntary .assignment. Jaffe, who had his demand allowed by…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Ames v. DowningNew York Surrogate's Court · 1850
- Mills v. ArgallNew York Court of Chancery · 1837
- Ward v. NewellNew York Supreme Court · 1864