Hartness v. . Wallace
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This was a civil ACTION, commenced before a Justice of the Peace and carried by appeal to the February Term, 1889, of Iredell Superior Court, and tried before Shipp, J. By consent a jury trial was waived, and his Honor found the facts as follows: 1. The firm of Connelly & Deitz consisted of oñe J. B. Connelly and M. J. Deitz, and was organized eight or ten years ago, and continued in the business of buying and selling wagons and buggies until the assignment made by said firm…
Read the full summary
This was a civil ACTION, commenced before a Justice of the Peace and carried by appeal to the February Term, 1889, of Iredell Superior Court, and tried before Shipp, J. By consent a jury trial was waived, and his Honor found the facts as follows: 1. The firm of Connelly & Deitz consisted of oñe J. B. Connelly and M. J. Deitz, and was organized eight or ten years ago, and continued in the business of buying and selling wagons and buggies until the assignment made by said firm to the plaintiff J. A. Hartness, in the month of August, 1888. 2. That on the 27th day of the month of June, 1888, M.…
1Opinion of the Court
MERimiON, C. J.:
The contention that the action involves and requires an account and settlement of the partnership matters and business mentioned, and, therefore, the Court of a Justice of the Peace had not jurisdiction of the subject-matter of the action, is unfounded. The firm mentioned, by its deed of assignment, conveyed to the plaintiff “certain personal property and all the choses in action that belonged to the firm-, in trust to sell said property and collect the debts due the firm for the use and benefit of the creditors,” &c. The sole purpose of the action is to collect (recover) a…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- N. Rogers & Sons v. BatchelorSupreme Court of the United States · 1838
- Dob & Dob v. HalseyNew York Supreme Court · 1819
- Abrams v. . CuretonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1876
- Ross v. . HendersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1877
- Alexander v. . WristonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1879
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- McIntosh v. Detroit Savings BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1929
- Searles v. ChristensenSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1894
- Nichols & Co. v. ThomasSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
- Wharton v. . WoodburnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1838