Haslet v. Kent
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 187, July T., 1893, by Samuel C. Kent et al., trading as J. N. Remsen & Co., Ltd., from order of C. P. Chester Co., Jan. T., 1893, No. 76, making absolute rule for judgment for want of sufficient affidavit of defence in favor of Haslet, Flanagan & Co. Rule for judgment for want of sufficient affidavit of defence in assumpsit on promissory note. From plaintiff’s statement and the record, it appeared that defendants were sued as general partners.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 187, July T., 1893, by Samuel C. Kent et al., trading as J. N. Remsen & Co., Ltd., from order of C. P. Chester Co., Jan. T., 1893, No. 76, making absolute rule for judgment for want of sufficient affidavit of defence in favor of Haslet, Flanagan & Co. Rule for judgment for want of sufficient affidavit of defence in assumpsit on promissory note. From plaintiff’s statement and the record, it appeared that defendants were sued as general partners. They alleged that they constituted a limited partnership association. In their affidavit of defence they set forth their certificate of…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mil.Chief Justice Sterrett,
The defendants, sued as general partners, denied their liability as such and claimed to be a limited partnership association properly organized under the act of June 2, 1874, P. L. 271, and its supplement of May 1, 1876, P. L. 89. They thus assumed the burden of setting forth in their affidavit of defence such compliance with the provisions of the act as entitled them to the benefit of exemption from liability as general partners. Instead of doing so, however, we think their affidavit discloses noncompliance with the requirements of the act and its…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Laflin & Rand Co. v. Steytler, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County1892
- Maloney v. BruceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1880
- Cock v. Bailey, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County1892
- Vanhorn v. CorcoranSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889
- Gearing v. CarrollSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Chatham National Bank v. GardnerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
- First National Bank v. CrevelingSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
- In re Assignment of the Mill Work & Mantel Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
- Lee v. BurnleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1900