Meeker v. Thompson
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Assumpsit by the plaintiffs as late partners under the name of Meeker & Shelton, for the recovery of a partnership claim; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of Fairfield County. The defendant pleaded the general issue, -with notice of a set-off of a claim held by him against Meeker individually.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit by the plaintiffs as late partners under the name of Meeker & Shelton, for the recovery of a partnership claim; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of Fairfield County. The defendant pleaded the general issue, -with notice of a set-off of a claim held by him against Meeker individually. The court ( De Forest, J.,) sustained the claim of set-off, and rendered judgment in favor of Shelton for half the partnership claim and in favor of the defendant against Meeker for the amount due him from Meeker less one-half the partnership debt. Both the plaintiffs and defendant moved for a new…
1Opinion of the CourtLoomis, J.
The question in this case is one of set-off, and arises out of the following facts found by the court:—The plaintiffs for several years prior to March, 1873, were equal partners in business, and as such furnished goods and performed services for the defendant to the amount of $202.86. In March, 187.3, the partnership was dissolved, and in the settlement of the partnership accounts between the partners, all the book accounts of the firm, including that against the defendant, were assigned to Henry T. Shelton, one of the partners, and on such settlement George II. Meeker, the other of the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Snyder v. SpurrSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1866
- Spurr v. SnyderSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1868
3Cited by2 opinions
- Lippitt v. Thames Loan & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1914
- Leavitt v. PeabodySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1882