Gilruth v. Decell
Mississippi Supreme Court
From: the chancery court of Yazoo county. HoN. H. C. CoNN, Chancellor. Appellee, Kate Decell, widow of T. F. Decell, filed this bill against I. N. Gilruth, as surviving partner of Gilruth & Decell, a firm composed of her husband and the defendant.
Read the full summary
From: the chancery court of Yazoo county. HoN. H. C. CoNN, Chancellor. Appellee, Kate Decell, widow of T. F. Decell, filed this bill against I. N. Gilruth, as surviving partner of Gilruth & Decell, a firm composed of her husband and the defendant. The bill alleges that complainant was the owner of $1,600 realized from .the sale of her separate property, and on deposit, to her credit, in the Capital State-Bank of Jackson; that her husband withdrew the money from the bank, having forged her name to a check for' that purpose; that she remained ignorant of the transaction for some months…
1Opinion of the CourtWhitfield, J.
It is not alleged in the bill that Gilruth actually participated in the fraud by which Decell converted the trust-fund to his own use, and afterwards paid it into the firm ip payment of the balance of his subscription to its capital stock; nor that he had any actual knowledge of anything done by Decell in connection therewith. The acts and doings of Decell throughout were wholly outside the scope of the partnership business. Under these circumstances, whilst there may be some cases to the contrary — as 68 Ala., 382, and 31 Ga., 362 — it is well settled in Mississippi (Pickels v. McPherson, 59…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Robertshaw v. HanwayMississippi Supreme Court · 1876
- Pickels v. McPhersonMississippi Supreme Court · 1881
- Welker v. WallaceSupreme Court of Georgia · 1860
- Evans v. BidlemanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1853