Van Bramer v. Cooper
New York Supreme Court
This was an action of assumpsit., against the defendant, Cooper, and one Thomas Van Bramer, for one thousand dollars Tent by the intestate, and for which Cooper and the other defendant gave an accountable receipt for the re-payment of the money in one year.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit., against the defendant, Cooper, and one Thomas Van Bramer, for one thousand dollars Tent by the intestate, and for which Cooper and the other defendant gave an accountable receipt for the re-payment of the money in one year. The receipt mentioned that the one thousand dollars, with another sum of one thousand dollars furnished by Cooper, t was‘to be vested in stock in trade under the management of the defendants, as. grocers, under the firm of Cooper and Van Bramer. Cooper alone was arrested on the capias issued against the defendants, the sheriff having…
1Opinion of the CourtTompkins, J.
deliveredthe opinion of the court.
The infancy of the defendant, Thomas Van Bramer, was a personal privilege of which he alone could avail himself. The fact of infancy not being pleaded, or taken advantage of by him, the co-debtor, cannot shield himself, on that ground, from the performance of his contract.
*280The proof of a partnership between the intestate and Samuel Cooper, was wholly irrelevant, because the existence of such a partnership would not have precluded a recovery upon the contract produced, and proved at the trial; inasmuch, as such contract was a special, separate, and independent…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hartness v. ThompsonNew York Supreme Court · 1809
3Cited by7 opinions
- Roof v. StaffordNew York Supreme Court · 1827
- Slocum v. Hooker & CatlinNew York Supreme Court · 1852
- Roberts v. WigginSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1817
- Simkins Simkins v. Searcy, GuardianCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1895
- In re the Estate of DonnellyNew York Surrogate's Court · 1939
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.