Looney v. Gillenwaters
Tennessee Supreme Court
FROM HAWKINS. Appeal from the Chancery Court at Rogersville, May Term, 1871. H. C. Smith, Ch. The principal errors relied on in this cause upon "which a reversal is asked are the following, viz.; 1. The master, in stating his account, charges defendant, Gillenwaters, with $125, and the interest thereon, for — years, making the total sum of $ — , as so. much lost to the partnership concern by said partner’s, having paid more by one-fourth cent per pound for hogs purchased…
Read the full summary
FROM HAWKINS. Appeal from the Chancery Court at Rogersville, May Term, 1871. H. C. Smith, Ch. The principal errors relied on in this cause upon "which a reversal is asked are the following, viz.; 1. The master, in stating his account, charges defendant, Gillenwaters, with $125, and the interest thereon, for — years, making the total sum of $ — , as so. much lost to the partnership concern by said partner’s, having paid more by one-fourth cent per pound for hogs purchased than was agreed should be paid, although the proof shows that the hogs thus purchased were put into drove, taken to market…
1Opinion of the Court
Fkeemaít, J.,
delivered the opinion of the court.
This bill was filed to wind up and settle a partnership entered into in 1853 in buying and selling a drove of hogs, to be bought in East Tennessee and sent south and there disposed of.
It is alleged in the bill that the contract of partnership expressly stipulated that the two partners, Charles and Gillenwaters, were not to pay for hogs. more. than four cents per pound gross, they attending to the purchase of the hogs, the other partner, Robinson, being absent in the south at the time on a trading expedition. It is charged that Gillenwaters, in…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Kurzawski v. MarczynskiMichigan Supreme Court · 1929