Legal Opinion

Devol v. McIntosh

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1864PublishedCited by 22 opinions

APPEAL from the Floyd Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the CourtGregory, J.

Devol aucl Fordyce brought an action in the court below against McIntosh, Beharrell, Morris, and Dodgers, alleging in their complaint that McIntosh and Beharrell were partners; that they agreed to dissolve their copartnership; that Beharrell assigned his interest in the assets of the firm to McIntosh, in consideration of which the appellees made their bond in the penal sum of $3,000, with the following condition:

“ The condition of this obligation is, that whereas said McIntosh and Beharrell, having dissolved copartnership in business, and said McIntosh has purchased all the interest of said…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Curtis v. TylerNew York Court of Chancery · 1842
  2. Chace v. HinmanNew York Supreme Court · 1832
  3. Churchill v. HuntNew York Supreme Court · 1846
  4. Moses v. MurgatroydNew York Court of Chancery · 1814
  5. In re NegusNew York Supreme Court · 1832

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Lowe v. TurpieIndiana Supreme Court · 1896
  2. Indiana University v. Indiana Bonding & Surety Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1981
  3. Miller v. BillingslyIndiana Supreme Court · 1873
  4. Tinkler v. SwaynieIndiana Supreme Court · 1880
  5. Ferris v. American Brewing Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1900

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API