Bonebright v. Pease
Michigan Supreme Court
Appeal from St. Joseph Circuit iu Chancery. • The bill was filed in this case for discovery and relief, the 13th May, 1852, alleging that in 1849 complainant entered into co-partnership at Constantine, with Brush Sutherland, and Denio & Pierce, in the cast iron manufactory, under the firm of “ Sutherland, Denio & Co.” — and that complainant paid into said firm $560; that in February, 1850, complainant having left for California, Jacob Bonebright, complainant’s father, as his…
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Joseph Circuit iu Chancery. • The bill was filed in this case for discovery and relief, the 13th May, 1852, alleging that in 1849 complainant entered into co-partnership at Constantine, with Brush Sutherland, and Denio & Pierce, in the cast iron manufactory, under the firm of “ Sutherland, Denio & Co.” — and that complainant paid into said firm $560; that in February, 1850, complainant having left for California, Jacob Bonebright, complainant’s father, as his agent and by his direction, sold out complainant’s interest in the firm for $560; that Sutherland having a short time…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Pratt, J.
Néither on the argument; nor in the .subsequent examination of this case, have the Court been able to discover any errors in the proceedings or decree in the Court below. .
The-agreement of the defendants to pay the outstanding debts of the old'firm of Sutherland-, Denio & Co. in its legal effect, is a mere undertaking on their part, to indemnify the complainant against those debts, and ’:so the agreement has been treatéd, as well in the draft of the' bill as in the argument of the case, and yet the. complainant does" not pretend, by any allegation -contained,-in-his…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Sullivan v. LeerColorado Court of Appeals · 1892
- Title Guaranty & Surety Co. v. Ætna Indemnity Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1911
- Sullivan v. LeerColorado Court of Appeals · 1892