Davis v. Davis
Mississippi Supreme Court
Appeal from the Chancery Court of Adams County. Hon. Kalph North, Chancellor. The case is stated in the opinion of the court. The fourth ground of demurrer is like unto the third, only it is more strongly expressed and points out a graver defect in the bill of complaint than that which we have just discussed. Said bill seeks to compel only an accounting of the business pertaining to the described lands without reference to the other business of the alleged partnership.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Chancery Court of Adams County. Hon. Kalph North, Chancellor. The case is stated in the opinion of the court. The fourth ground of demurrer is like unto the third, only it is more strongly expressed and points out a graver defect in the bill of complaint than that which we have just discussed. Said bill seeks to compel only an accounting of the business pertaining to the described lands without reference to the other business of the alleged partnership. This is certainly fatally defective, since “ there can be no division of partnership property until all the accounts of the…
1Opinion of the CourtChalmers, J.
The bill avers that complainant and defendant were partners in the business of farming under the firm name of H. L. Davis & Co., and desiring, after continuing the business for several years, to enlarge their operations, bought for this purpose a tract of land known as the Duncan Homochitto place, the negotiation for the purchase having been inaugurated by complainant and consummated by the defendant. The land was paid for out of the assets of the firm by a draft in the firm name, on their factors in New Orleans. But the deed was by the defendant taken in his individual name. • This was done…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Kruschke v. StefanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1892
- Treacy v. PowerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1910
- Stuckey v. DouglasSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1966
- Weirich v. DodgeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1899