Legal Opinion

Bow v. Young Yung

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided April 17, 1899PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Appeal prom District Court of Honolulu.

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT BY

FREAR, J.

This is an action for $64 and interest upon a promissory note for $Y0 (upon which $6 had bien paid) given to the plaintiff by one of the defendants in the name of the pártnership composed of both defendants. The defense was that one partner had no authority to give a note in the name of the firm. The District Magistrate found for the plaintiff and the case now comes here on defendant’s appeal on points of law.

The general rule is that each partner is an agent of the partnership with implied authority to act for the firm in all matters within the scope of its…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Pease v. ColeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1885
  2. Dowling v. Exchange Bank of BostonSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  3. Vetsch v. NeissSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1896

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Hee Fat v. Wong KwaiHawaii Supreme Court · 1916
  2. MacIel v. TellesHawaii Supreme Court · 1928
  3. Yee Chin v. Chu SoiHawaii Supreme Court · 1904

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

Powered by the Exa API