Morgan v. Watmough
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
This was an action of trover brought by William B. Morgan against John G. Watmough, Esq., high sheriff of the city and county of Philadelphia, to recover certain goods alleged in the declaration to be the property of the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
This was an action of trover brought by William B. Morgan against John G. Watmough, Esq., high sheriff of the city and county of Philadelphia, to recover certain goods alleged in the declaration to be the property of the plaintiff. The vilrit issued on the 13th of June, 1837. On the trial before Sergeant, J., at a Court of Nisi Prius, held in Philadelphia, on the 9th of March, 1838, the plaintiff proved that he purchased in the name of Parker and Morgan the articles mentioned in the declaration; that for some of them the notes of Parker and Morgan were given: and he admitted that they were…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Sergeant, J.
It cannot now be questioned that partnership, effects are liable to be attached in a suit brought against one of the partners to recover a private debt due by him. That point was deliberately considered by the Supreme Court in M'Carty v. Emlen, (2 Dall. 277,) and was decided by a majority of the Court. The practice has always since been in consonance with this decision, and the reasoning of Chief Justice M'Kean is conclusive as to the justice and propriety of the principle.
The only question that remains open for examination is, whether the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- M'Carty v. EmlenSupreme Court of the United States · 1797
3Cited by5 opinions
- James L. v. CarrylSupreme Court of the United States · 1858
- Pennsylvania Railroad v. PennockSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1866
- Rankin v. CulverSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
- Rex v. Paramount Rubber Co. of New JerseySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
- James L. v. CarrylSupreme Court of the United States · 1858