Burleigh v. Parton
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Cherokee. Tried below before Hon. B. A. Beeves. Suit on a note, made in the name of Wilkins & Burleigh. Burleigh alleges that it was executed by Wilkins fór a debt, owing by Wilkins & Boyd, without his knowledge or consent. These facts were proved on the trial. The evidence in relation to the ratification by Burleigh is given in the Opinion. There was a verdict and judgment for the appellee. Motion for new trial made and overruled.
1Opinion of the CourtRobebts, J.
Burleigh was not originally liable for the note, although it was executed in the firm name by his partner. Because it was given for a consideration disconnected with the business of the partnership.
The only question about which there can be any controversy is, as to the confirmation of the act.of his partner after the note was executed. Parton, being sworn, testified that he presented the note to Burleigh, “ who said that he would settle the same, if he could get the books, notes and accounts from Wilkins,” (his partner.)
Hoyt testified that he was present at one time, when Par-ton presented…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Green v. Waco State BankTexas Supreme Court · 1890
- Miller v. WhiteCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1937
- Fort Dearborn National Bank v. BerrottCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1900
- San Antonio Irrigation Co. v. DeutschmannTexas Supreme Court · 1908