United States v. McCoy
District Court, S.D. Alabama
At Lav/. On motion to amend complaint brought against Franklin J. McCoy and B. E. Brooks, doing business under the firm name and style of the Wilson Lumber Company, by adding the name of “Franklin J. McCoy, individually.”
1Opinion of the Court
TOXJLMIM, District Judge.
The two defendants, Franklin J. McCoy and B. E. Brooks, are individually liable for the acts of the partnership of which they were members, and the complaint is against them individually as well as against the partnership for the trespass complained of as having been committed by them doing business under the firm name and style of the Wilson Lumber Company. Superadding the name of Franklin J. McCoy and the word “individually” could not make him any more liable therefor,, if that is the purpose. The amendment proposed is therefore useless and unnecessary, would be…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Burns v. CampbellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1882
- Beavers v. HardieSupreme Court of Alabama · 1877
- Miller v. Northern Bank of MississippiMississippi Supreme Court · 1857
- Kyzer v. MiddletonMississippi Supreme Court · 1883
3Cited by3 opinions
- Bryan v. SullivanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
- Belgian American Maritime Co. v. The Great NorthernDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 1896
- Brown v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1909