Farnum v. Farnum
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Action of contract for money paid to the defendants’ use Otis Famum, one of the defendants, was defaulted." At the trial in the court of common pleas, at December term 1858, before Mellen, C. J., it appeared that in 1851 and 1852 Franklin and Otis Farnum had been engaged jointly, and also each on his own account, in the business of buying and selling cattle, raising money upon their own notes without indorsement ; and that in 1853 and 1854 they were both engaged in the same…
Read the full summary
Action of contract for money paid to the defendants’ use Otis Famum, one of the defendants, was defaulted." At the trial in the court of common pleas, at December term 1858, before Mellen, C. J., it appeared that in 1851 and 1852 Franklin and Otis Farnum had been engaged jointly, and also each on his own account, in the business of buying and selling cattle, raising money upon their own notes without indorsement ; and that in 1853 and 1854 they were both engaged in the same business with E. T. Arehbald & Company in the State of New York, and the plaintiff, who was the mother of the…
1Opinion of the CourtMetcalf, J.
The paper signed by Archbald & Company, dated April 14th 1856, and offered in evidence by the plaintiff, was rightly excluded. It was offered “ for the purpose of showing that the defendants,” F. M. Farnum and O. Farnum, “ were and did constitute but one party in the joint trade or business of buying and selling cattle, and for the purpose of raising a presumption that there was between the defendants a joint interest or partnership in the cattle trade or business down to the time when the 9th of March notes were made.” We are of opinion that the paper had no legitimate tendency to show such…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Norris v. BadgerNew York Supreme Court · 1826