Burnham v. Hopkinson
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Foreign Attachment. The plaintiff elected to try the question of the liability of the trustee by the jury, after which the parties agreed upon the following statement of facts: Hopkinson, and Sibley, the trustee, were formerly copartners in trade, and the partnership was dissolved in the month of October, 1836. In the month of June, 1837, Hopkinson absconded. No settlement was ever made between the partners.
Read the full summary
Foreign Attachment. The plaintiff elected to try the question of the liability of the trustee by the jury, after which the parties agreed upon the following statement of facts: Hopkinson, and Sibley, the trustee, were formerly copartners in trade, and the partnership was dissolved in the month of October, 1836. In the month of June, 1837, Hopkinson absconded. No settlement was ever made between the partners. The plaintiff alleges that there is a balance in the hands of the trustee after a settlement of the affairs of the partnership. The trustee alleges that there would be a balance due him…
1Opinion of the CourtParker, C. J.
It is quite clear that this is not a case in which the liability of the trustee can be tried by a jury. According to the statement, it would involve the investigation of the whole of the partnership accounts and transactions, for the purpose of ascertaining the balance ; a matter which is never submitted to a jury.
And this shows, also, that this process cannot be maintained, against the partner summoned as trustee, for trial in any other shape. He cannot in this case undertake to settle the partnership accounts, which as yet remain unsettled. The remedy for the adjustment of the partnership…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Estes v. WhippleSupreme Court of Vermont · 1840
- Atkins v. PrescottSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1839
- Burley & Harris v. HarrisSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1836
- Judd & Harris v. WilsonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1834
- Chase v. GarvinSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1841