Stiles v. Meyer
New York Supreme Court
This was an appeal by the defendant from a judgment for the plaintiff, entered on the report of a referee. The plaintiffs sued upon a promissory note made to them in the firm name of Jacob L. Bach & Co., and their complaint also contained a count in assumpsit against the defendants as joint purchasers of goods. The defendant, Bach, made default but Meyer answered.
Read the full summary
This was an appeal by the defendant from a judgment for the plaintiff, entered on the report of a referee. The plaintiffs sued upon a promissory note made to them in the firm name of Jacob L. Bach & Co., and their complaint also contained a count in assumpsit against the defendants as joint purchasers of goods. The defendant, Bach, made default but Meyer answered. The referee found that on and prior to the 18th of February, 1866, and from thence until after the second of April following, the defendants, other than said Meyer, were in partnership under the name of “Jacob L. Bach & Co.,” and…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court—
Gilbert, J.
The referee has found as matter of fact', upon evidence which is conflicting, that the note in suit was taken by the plaintiffs as the note of the firm of J. L. Bach & Co., of which they supposed the defendant, Meyer, was a member; that the consideration of the note was *192goods sold to such firm; that on the occasion when the goods were sold Meyer and Bach stated that Meyer was to be a member of said firm in about six weeks; that they then wished to buy goods of the plaintiffs for said new firm; that they jointly purchased the goods for which the note in suit was given…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- The People v. . GonzalezNew York Court of Appeals · 1866
- Burns v. RowlandNew York Supreme Court · 1863
3Cited by1 opinion
- Sneider v. Big Horn Milling Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1921