Fountain v. Hutchinson
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Calhoun; Smith, J. Assumpsit by Olive M. Fountain against Charles Hutchinson to recover the value of certain personal property alleged to have been sold to the defendant. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant brings error. Plaintiff’s husband, John Fountain, and defendant, were in partnership in the business of manufacturing cultivators, Fountain owning one-third interest, and defendant two-thirds.
Read the full summary
Error to Calhoun; Smith, J. Assumpsit by Olive M. Fountain against Charles Hutchinson to recover the value of certain personal property alleged to have been sold to the defendant. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant brings error. Plaintiff’s husband, John Fountain, and defendant, were in partnership in the business of manufacturing cultivators, Fountain owning one-third interest, and defendant two-thirds. Among the partnership assets were a boiler and engine, machinery, and tools. February 20, 1892, Fountain claims to have sold to the plaintiff his one-third interest in the machinery,…
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.
(after stating the facts). Errors are assigned upon the admission and exclusion of evidence, upon the refusal to give certain requests, and upon the charge as given. The court refused to permit any inquiry to be made into the partnership agreement, and rejected testimony offered to the effect that Mr. Fountain, at- the time of the alleged sale to his wife, had no real interest in the partnership property, and was in fact indebted to defendant. He also refused to instruct the jury as to the effect of a sale by one partner of his interest in any or all of the partnership property in payment of…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Campau v. MoranMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
- Richardson v. McGoldrickMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
- Banghart v. HydeMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
- Colwell v. AdamsMichigan Supreme Court · 1883
3Cited by1 opinion
- Neal v. NealMichigan Supreme Court · 1914