Wilson v. Wallace
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
^ NARR. in assumpsit for goods sold and delivered by the plaintiff, Thomas Wilson, to the defendant’s testator, Plea non assumpsit.
Read the full summary
^ NARR. in assumpsit for goods sold and delivered by the plaintiff, Thomas Wilson, to the defendant’s testator, Plea non assumpsit. A verdict was taken for the plaintiff, Nisi Prius subject to the opinion of the court, whether, upon the evidence, the suit was rightly brought, or can be sustained, in the name of Thomas Wilson alone, or ought to have ’ ° been brought originally in the name of all the. partners; the fact being, that the goods were sold to the defendant’s testator by a house in England, trading under the name of Thomas Wilson, but consisting of Thomas Wilson, William Rowlett, and…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Duncan J.'
The declaration is in assumpsit, for goods sold and delivered by Thomas Wilson to the defendant’s testator. The plea is non assumpsit.
It is agreed, that the contract was made with a house, carrying on trade under the name of Thomas Wilson, but which consisted of Thomas Wilson, William Rowlett, and Gabriel *55Shaw. Shaw and Rozvlett were not secret of dormant part-tiers, but acting and ostensible..
As the law stood formerly,,the rule prevailed, as well as to defendants ás to plaintiffs, that if, in assumpsit, it appeared on the trial, that all the…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Chamberlin v. HiteSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1836
- Kelly v. EichmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1838
- Morse v. Chase & Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1835
- Alexander v. M'GinnSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1834
- Grenell v. SharpSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1839
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.