Johnson v. Totten
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District. This was an action for money had and received by defendants, as co-partners in trade for the use of the plaintiff, being the proceeds of goods sold by defendants on consignment, from plaintiff. The suit was commenced May 31st, 1852; one of the defendants, Totten, made default, the other, Kellogg, answered.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District. This was an action for money had and received by defendants, as co-partners in trade for the use of the plaintiff, being the proceeds of goods sold by defendants on consignment, from plaintiff. The suit was commenced May 31st, 1852; one of the defendants, Totten, made default, the other, Kellogg, answered. The case was referred to 0. T. Emmett as a sole referee, to try all issues and report a judgment in the case. There was proof of several consignments by several vessels, to be sold at the usual commissions of ten per cent, and…
1Opinion of the CourtHeydenfeldt, Justice
Murray, Chief Justice, concurred.
The respondent urges that two sales, and 'receipts therefrom of money were made after the dissolution of the partnership, one by each partner, and that they were therefore not jointly liable. I am satisfied that notwithstanding the dissolution of the part*347nership, yet for the purpose of fulfilling engagements made daring its existence, it had a limited existence legally, and subsisted for such purpose, even after the act of dissolution by the parties. See Collyer on Part. 118.
Independent of this position, it is positively shown that the plaintiff had no notice…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Mares v. MaresMontana Supreme Court · 1921
- Dellapiazza v. FoleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Gilchrist v. BrandeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1883
- Kelley v. McNameeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1908
- Gage Bros. v. Rogers SistersMissouri Court of Appeals · 1892
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.