Legal Opinion · Concurrence

First Tennessee Production Credit Ass'n v. Davis

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided March 28, 1988Published

1ConcurrenceFones, Justice

I concur in the result reached by the majority opinion. However, I do not agree that the statement that “a partner cannot charge his private debt to the firm without the consent of his partners,” is the principle of law upon which this case should be decided.

There are very few words in the English language that have as many meanings as “charge.” But in the context in which it is used in the majority opinion, it appears to mean the incurring of an obligation, at the time of origin of the transaction, such as a partner borrowing money or making a purchase on the credit of the partnership.…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. N. Rogers & Sons v. BatchelorSupreme Court of the United States · 1838
  2. Dob & Dob v. HalseyNew York Supreme Court · 1819
  3. J. D. Evernghim v. R. & A. EnsworthNew York Supreme Court · 1831
  4. Livingston v. RooseveltNew York Supreme Court · 1809
  5. Burwell & Clarke v. SpringfieldSupreme Court of Alabama · 1849

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API