Jacobs & Co. v. Shorey
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit on two notes, and for money had and received, and for goods sold. The defendants were A. J. Shorey and N. ,F. Mathes. Shorey was defaulted, and was a witness for plaintiffs. The principal question was, whether Mathes was a partner with Shorey, March 8th and April 12, 1866, when Shorey bought goods of plaintiffs in New York, and gave therefor the notes in suit. Shorey brought the goods to Portsmouth, and put them, in a store, and failed without having paid for them.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit on two notes, and for money had and received, and for goods sold. The defendants were A. J. Shorey and N. ,F. Mathes. Shorey was defaulted, and was a witness for plaintiffs. The principal question was, whether Mathes was a partner with Shorey, March 8th and April 12, 1866, when Shorey bought goods of plaintiffs in New York, and gave therefor the notes in suit. Shorey brought the goods to Portsmouth, and put them, in a store, and failed without having paid for them. He bought them, and gave the notes, in his own name, plaintiffs understanding that they were selling to him alone.…
1Opinion of the CourtNesmith, J.
To maintain this action, it becomes necessary for the plaintiffs to establish the fact that Mathes shared in the profits of the sale of the goods from them to Shorey, or that Mathes and Shorey were partners in that transaction, upon the ground that where goods are obtained for the use of a firm by means of the fraud of one its members/ the other partner, by receiving and participating in the use or sale of the goods, will be held to have adopted the fraudulent act of him who obtained them, and will be placed in the same situation in reference to' the rights of the vendors of the goods, as if…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Vans v. HigginsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1813