Kirby v. Ingersoll
Michigan Court of Chancery
The bill in this case was filed September 5, 1839, and states that November 9, 1833, complainant and Justus Ingersoll, one of the defendants, entered into a co-partnership in the trade and business of tanners, curriers, and dealers in leather; that they were to be equally interested, and devote their time and skill to the management of the business, under the firm and style of “IngersoII & Kirby,” and were to share the profits equally.
Read the full summary
The bill in this case was filed September 5, 1839, and states that November 9, 1833, complainant and Justus Ingersoll, one of the defendants, entered into a co-partnership in the trade and business of tanners, curriers, and dealers in leather; that they were to be equally interested, and devote their time and skill to the management of the business, under the firm and style of “IngersoII & Kirby,” and were to share the profits equally. That the co-partnership agreement was not reduced to writing; was to continue so long as they should be satisfied with each other. That immediately on entering…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
This case presents the broad question *184of the right of one partner to make an assignment of all the partnership effects, without the consent or concurrence of his, ...... - . co-partner, who is on the spot, and acting in the business ot the co-partnership. Perhaps no question has been presented to this court, of greater practical importance, than the present; and it has been considered with a full and deep conviction of the responsibility imposed upon the court in its decision.
The authority of one partner to make such an assignment, if sustained in the present case, must be…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Harrison v. SterrySupreme Court of the United States · 1809
- Egberts v. WoodNew York Court of Chancery · 1831
- Willis v. CorliesNew York Court of Chancery · 1834
3Cited by4 opinions
- Creighton v. CampbellColorado Court of Appeals · 1914
- Creighton v. CampbellColorado Court of Appeals · 1914
- Den ex dem. Young v. RobinsonSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1819
- Ex Parte Day, Trustee of M. J. AlleeSuperior Court of Delaware · 1878