Legal Opinion

A. G. Edwards & Son Brokerage Co. v. Rosenheim

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided April 12, 1898PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. L. B. Yalliant, Judge. “The interest of each partner is a right to a share of the surplus after dll debts of the firm have been paid, including the adjustment of balances due to the partners who have advanced more than the others, and it is his interest only which is to be taken.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. L. B. Yalliant, Judge. “The interest of each partner is a right to a share of the surplus after dll debts of the firm have been paid, including the adjustment of balances due to the partners who have advanced more than the others, and it is his interest only which is to be taken. A partner has no right, to any specific chattel, nor to divide a portion of the partnership property from the general fund as his share, and his creditor, therefore, *has 'no such right.’’ 2 Clement Bates on Partnership, sec. 1068, p. 1082; Lovell v. Farris, 24 Mo.…

1Opinion of the Court

Bland P. J.

statement.

*624 evidence.

*623— Defendants, Rosenheim &Link, are partners doing business as architects, under the firm name of Rosenheim & Link. The other defendants are debtors of the firm of Link & Rosenheim. Prior to the commencement of this suit the respondent (a corporation) recovered a judgment against A. F. Rosenheim for the sum of $425, upon which an execution had been issued and returned nulla bona. The respondents were also the owners and holders of Rosenheim’s overdue note for $139.95, which had not been reduced to a judgment. The suit is a bill in equity for the purpose of…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Reyburn v. MitchellSupreme Court of Missouri · 1891
  2. Trustees of the Freeholders & Commonalty of Huntington v. NicollNew York Supreme Court · 1808
  3. Goddard-Peck Grocery Co. v. McCuneSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
  4. Crim v. WalkerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
  5. Mullen v. HewittSupreme Court of Missouri · 1890

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Burnham, Munger & Co. v. SmithMissouri Court of Appeals · 1899
  2. Cape County Savings Bank v. WilsonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1931
  3. McBride v. Wayne Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1930
  4. Freedman v. HolbergMissouri Court of Appeals · 1901
  5. St. John Woodworking Co. v. SmithAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1903

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API