Clark v. Warden
Nebraska Supreme Court
Appeal from a decree rendered by Savaue, J., in the district"court of Douglas county. There is a sufficient statement of the case in the opinion. cited: Gen. Stat., 446. Morris v. Allen, 14 N. J. Eq., 44. Reynolds v. Mariis, 17 Ala., 82. Hodges v. Parker, 17 Vt., 242. Stoughton v. Lynch, 1 Johns.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a decree rendered by Savaue, J., in the district"court of Douglas county. There is a sufficient statement of the case in the opinion. cited: Gen. Stat., 446. Morris v. Allen, 14 N. J. Eq., 44. Reynolds v. Mariis, 17 Ala., 82. Hodges v. Parker, 17 Vt., 242. Stoughton v. Lynch, 1 Johns. Ch., 467. cited: Desha v. Smith, 20 Ala., 747. Hollister v, Barkley, 11 New Hamp., 501. Honoré v. Golmesnil, 1 J. J., Marshall, 541. S. 0., 7 Dana, 199. Lee v. Lashbrooke, 8 Dana, 214. Story on Part., Sec. 182, Note 3.
1Opinion of the CourtCobb, J.
The only question in this case arises upon that part of the decree which disallows interest to the plaintiff on the sum contributed to the firm by him in excess of that contributed by the defendant.
Upon first reading the authorities cited by counsel on either side at the argument, there would seem to be some conflict on this question of the right of a partner to interest on funds by him contributed to the capital of the firm, in excess of those contributed by his equal co-partner and used in the co-partnership business during the existence of the partnership. But upon a close examination and…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Dexter v. ArnoldU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Rhode Island · 1823
- Hodges v. ParkerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1845
- Reynolds v. Heirs of MardisSupreme Court of Alabama · 1849
- Stoughton v. LynchNew York Court of Chancery · 1815
3Cited by1 opinion
- Smith v. KnightSupreme Court of Iowa · 1893