Scheiffelin v. . Stevens
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This was an action of assumpsit for goods sold and delivered, tried before Osborne, J., at the Eall Term, 1861, of Buncombe Superior Court. .The plaintiffs were partners, dealing in drugs in the city of New York.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit for goods sold and delivered, tried before Osborne, J., at the Eall Term, 1861, of Buncombe Superior Court. .The plaintiffs were partners, dealing in drugs in the city of New York. The defendant and Boyd entered into a co-partnership in the drug business, in the town of Asheville, early in the year 1856, which was dissolved on the 7th of Dec., in the same year, and notice thereof published in the Spectator, a newspaper printed in Asheville, for three weeks, consecutively. The goods, for which this action was brought, were delivered to Boyd, in the name of Boyd…
1Opinion of the CourtBattle, J.
The point presented in this case-is said by the-counsel, for the plaintiffs, not to be found adjudicated in-any of the reports of this State. It is, however, well settled in the-mercantile law of England and in New York and in Tenner- see, and -.probably other States. See'Col. -on Part. sec. 532, et sag, and the cases referred to in the notes. In Wardwell v. Haight, 2 Barb. (N. Y. Rep.) 549, the ride is laid -down pre•cisely as is contended-lor by the-counsel of the plaintiffs in this case. That rule is, that when a partnership has had continuous dealings with a distant correspondent for some…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Straus, Gunst & Co. v. T. O. Sparrow & Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1908