Emanuel v. Draughn
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the Circuit Court of Monroe. Before the Hon. J. Bragg. This was an action of assumpsit, for goods sold and, der livered, and also a count for money had and received.
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit Court of Monroe. Before the Hon. J. Bragg. This was an action of assumpsit, for goods sold and, der livered, and also a count for money had and received. On the trial, a bill of exceptions was taken, which shows, that the plaintiff and defendants entered into a contract under seal, by which, as it is recited, the defendants had employed the plaintiff in error to hawk and peddle goods in the county of Conecuh, or elsewhere, for six months, on the following terms and conditions: The said Draughn & Crane bind themselves for the term of six months, to furnish to B. M.…
1Opinion of the CourtDargan, J.
Whea two or more persons simply agree to share the profits in. any trade or adventure between them, they will be considered partners; but if one is employed as a mere agent, to conduct, carry on, or aid in the management of the business, and it is agreed that he shall receive a certain portion of the profits in lieu of compensation, the contract will not be a partnership. 6 Ala. Rep. 215; Coll, on Part. 29. It is often a question of difficulty to determine, when the contract creates a partnership inter se se, and the decisions, both in England and the United States, are so conflicting on this…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hodges v. Dawes & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1844
3Cited by6 opinions
- Couch v. WoodruffSupreme Court of Alabama · 1879
- Tayloe v. BushSupreme Court of Alabama · 1883
- Bains Motor Co. v. Le CroySupreme Court of Alabama · 1923
- Howze v. PattersonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1875
- Reynolds v. HicksIndiana Supreme Court · 1862
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.