Deavitt v. Hooker
Supreme Court of Vermont
Chancery. The orator as assignee in insolvency of B. P. White alleged a partnership between said White and the defendant Hooker, conducted under the name of B. W. Hooker & Co., and sought to have the alleged partnership wound up and an accounting had. The cause was heard on bill, answer, master’s report and exceptions thereto, Washington County, March Term, 1900, Tyler, Chancellor. A decree was rendered dismissing the bill. The orator appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtWatson, J.
The material facts reported are that Hooker and one Wheeler were equal partners engaged in business under the firm name of B. W. Hooker & Company; that Wheeler and White, the insolvent debtor, executed their written contract dated October n, 1895, whereby Wheeler bargained, sold, and conveyed his entire interest in and to the partnership and partnership property, to White, in consideration whereof White agreed to assume the payment of certain promissory notes at the National Bank of Barre, amounting to $2,500, executed by Wheeler and others, and to cause the same to be taken up and delivered…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Loomis v. MarshallSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1837
- Macy v. CombsIndiana Supreme Court · 1860
- J. C. Hicks & Co. v. CramSupreme Court of Vermont · 1845
- Clark v. SmithSupreme Court of Vermont · 1880
- Fish v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1895
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Amey v. HallSupreme Court of Vermont · 1962
- Trask v. KarrickSupreme Court of Vermont · 1920