Wicks v. Lippman
Nevada Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Second Judicial District, Washoe County. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion and head notes. The agreement of dissolution and settlement is final and conclusive between the parties in this form of action. The plaintiff’s remedy, if any, is in equity, for fraud or mistake, and for an accounting, and in an action Lippman would be answerable only for half.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the Second Judicial District, Washoe County. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion and head notes. The agreement of dissolution and settlement is final and conclusive between the parties in this form of action. The plaintiff’s remedy, if any, is in equity, for fraud or mistake, and for an accounting, and in an action Lippman would be answerable only for half. (Collyer on Part. secs. 264 to 269, 276 to 281, and note 1 and cases cited on page 262-3-4; Ross v. Cornell, 45 Cal. 133.) I. An action upon breach of an express stipulation between partners will…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Hawley, O. J.:
Wicks and Lippman were copartners, engaged in business as merchants. On the fourteenth of November, 1876, the partnership was dissolved by mutual consent. Wicks agreed to pay Lippman three hundred and three dollars and eighty-eight cents; to take the book accounts and stock of goods on hand and settle all the outstanding indebtedness of the firm. After paying the said sum of three hundred and three dollars and eighty-eiglit cents, Wicks discovered that several of the accounts standing upon the books in favor of the firm had actually been paid to Lippman prior to the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Johnstone v. MorrisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
- Glade v. WhiteNebraska Supreme Court · 1894
- Martin v. StubbingsAppellate Court of Illinois · 1886