Ryerson v. Hendrie
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Des Moines District Court. Suit against one partner upon a partnership note, signed by the defendant in the firm name. The District Court held that no action could be maintained on a firm note against one member of the firm when sued alone; and refused to permit tbe note to be introduced in evidence. The plaintiff excepted and appeals from tbis ruling.
1Opinion of the CourtCole, J.
1. Parties: action against partner: constrnctionof statute. The petition alleges that the defendant, who was a member of tbe firm of C. Hendrie & Co., made and delivered to J. S. Everson, a promissory *''•*.«/ note for $656.87 in the copartnership name „ « „ , . ± oí U. Hendrie <fc Co., ot which a copy is ' ... . , A " annexed, and which is past due and wholly unpaid. The sole question presented and discussed by counsel is, whether such a suit can be maintained.
*482That it could not be maintained at the Common law is clear, and indisputed by counsel in this case. Has our statute changed the rule?…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Sellon & Co. v. BradenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1862
3Cited by3 opinions
- First Nat. Bank of Abbeville v. CappsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1922
- Thompson v. WhiteSupreme Court of Colorado · 1898
- Redman & Fear v. Malvin & CloudSupreme Court of Iowa · 1867