Dayton v. Bartlett
Ohio Supreme Court
Error to the Superior Court of Cincinnati. The plaintiff below, defendant here, brought suit for a settlement of accounts of the firm of Phillips & Jordan, and for a judgment against the defendants below for moneys claimed to have been collected by them from the assets of that firm. Thomas Phillips.and Richard Jordan had for many years prior to 1858 carried on business as partners.
Read the full summary
Error to the Superior Court of Cincinnati. The plaintiff below, defendant here, brought suit for a settlement of accounts of the firm of Phillips & Jordan, and for a judgment against the defendants below for moneys claimed to have been collected by them from the assets of that firm. Thomas Phillips.and Richard Jordan had for many years prior to 1858 carried on business as partners. This consisted of an extensive iron business, conducting a rolling-mill, several furnaces, an iron-store and other enterprises. In 1858, Richard Jordan died and Thomas Phillips as surviving partner attended to…
1Opinion of the CourtJohnson, J.
Are the executors of Thomas Phillips, the surviving partner, as matter of law prevented from receiving compensation for services rendered in winding up the partnership business of Phillips & Jordan, in the absence of an agreement or understanding to that effect ?
From the death of Jordan in 1858, the partnership of Phillips & Jordan was in liquidation.
Until 1870 it was under the control of Phillips as survivor. After that, aud until the commencement of this suit, his executors were engaged in settling up. They have rendered faithful and valuable services, and in every respect, so far as the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Manning v. ManningNew York Court of Chancery · 1815
- Ex parte CasselSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1834