White v. Tudor
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Victoria. Tried below before the Hon. Fielding Jones. This suit was commenced by Henry Tudor, the appellee, against S. A. White, the appellant, in the Court of a Justice of the Peace, on a note for $75.33, purporting to have been executed to Tudor by S. A. White & Co., on which there was a credit of $27.38. The defendant pleaded non est faetum.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Victoria. Tried below before the Hon. Fielding Jones. This suit was commenced by Henry Tudor, the appellee, against S. A. White, the appellant, in the Court of a Justice of the Peace, on a note for $75.33, purporting to have been executed to Tudor by S. A. White & Co., on which there was a credit of $27.38. The defendant pleaded non est faetum. There was a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, and the defendant removed the case to the District Court by writ of certiorari. Upon the trial, the plaintiff offered to read in evidence the deposition of James Ashworth, to which the…
1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.
We are of opinion that the third specification of the assignment of errors, presents for our consideration an error, for which the judgment of the court below must be reversed. It is clear from the evidence, that the note sued on was executed by Ashworth, after the dissolution of the firm of S. A. White & Co. The law seems to be clearly settled, that after the dissolution of a partnership, one of the partners cannot impose new obligations upon the firm, or vary the form or character of those already existing. (3 Kent’s Com. 72.) It is also held, that one partner cannot, after the dissolution…
2Cited by19 opinions
- R. A. Brown & Co. v. ChancellorTexas Supreme Court · 1884
- Long v. GarnettTexas Supreme Court · 1883
- Reclamation Co. v. SimmonsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1927
- Bank v. Hollingsworth.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
- Jones v. MitchellCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1932
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.