Legal Opinion

Pepper, Arnold & Co. v. Peck

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Decided May 17, 1890PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Plaintiff’s petition for a new trial.

1Opinion of the CourtStiness, J.

The petition shows that the plaintiff, Pepper, had done work for the defendant for several years before the formation of the present firm, taking his pay therefor in groceries from the defendant’s store. Arnold became his partner, under the name of Pepper, Arnold & Co., and it was then mutually agreed that they should continue to do work for the defendant, to be paid for in the same way, and that the amount so paid should be charged to Pepper’s account when the settlement was made. The charges for the work done were entered upon the plaintiffs’ books against the defendant, and an account was…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Sexton v. AndersonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1888
  2. Davis v. . SpencerNew York Court of Appeals · 1862
  3. Woodmansie v. HolcombSupreme Court of Kansas · 1885
  4. Jewett v. MeechIndiana Supreme Court · 1885

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Reyburn v. MitchellSupreme Court of Missouri · 1891
  2. Caldwell Backing & T. Co. v. PorterOregon Supreme Court · 1908
  3. Mansur-Tebbetts Implement Co. v. RitchieSupreme Court of Missouri · 1900

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

Powered by the Exa API