Manhattan Co. v. Laimbeer
New York Supreme Court
Case on exceptions to a verdict directed for the plaintiff at the trial. - The president and directors of the Manhattan Company sued Richard H. Laimbeer, upon promissory notes given by a firm of which defendant was a member.
Read the full summary
Case on exceptions to a verdict directed for the plaintiff at the trial. - The president and directors of the Manhattan Company sued Richard H. Laimbeer, upon promissory notes given by a firm of which defendant was a member. The material question is whether Laimbeer was a general or a special partner in the firm, he claiming that a limited partnership had been formed by him under the provisions of the Limited Partnership Act (3 R. S. 7 ed. 2235). As to filing and recording the certificate required to be made, this act provides as follows: “ § 6. The certificate so acknowledged and certified,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.—Vah Vorst, J.
—Limited partner ships can .only be formed in' pursuance of the statute, and in the manner substantially directed. It is provided by statute that persons desirous of forming such a partnership shall make, sign and acknowledge a certificate, ‘ the contents of which are given; that the certificate shall be filed in the office of the clerk of the county in which the principal place of business of the partnership shall be situated; that the certificate shall be recorded by the clerk “in a book to be kept for that purpose, open to public inspectionthat “no such…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Veeder v. . MudgettNew York Court of Appeals · 1884
- Durant v. . AbendrothNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
- Van Ingen v. . WhitmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Cameron v. . SeamanNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
- Haviland v. ChaceNew York Supreme Court · 1860
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.