McConomy v. Reed
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 299, Jan. T., 1892, by plaintiff, Lucy A. McConomy, administratrix of Ambrose Mc-Conomy, deceased, from decree of C. P. Lancaster Co., Eq. Doc. No. 2, p. 802, dismissing bill for account filed against defendants, George K. Reed, B. J. MoGrann and R. H. Brub,akers. Bill for partnership account.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 299, Jan. T., 1892, by plaintiff, Lucy A. McConomy, administratrix of Ambrose Mc-Conomy, deceased, from decree of C. P. Lancaster Co., Eq. Doc. No. 2, p. 802, dismissing bill for account filed against defendants, George K. Reed, B. J. MoGrann and R. H. Brub,akers. Bill for partnership account. It appeared in evidence before the master, W. A. Atlee, that the books of the firm, after Aug. 5,1880, the date of the alleged dissolution of the partnership, showed an account with Ambrose McConomy debiting him with money due the firm and crediting him with dividends equally with the other…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Me. Justice McCollum,
It is admitted that Ambrose McConomy was at one time a member of the banking firm of Reed, McGrann & Co., but it is contended by the respondents, who are the appellees here, that his connection with the partnership was terminated by his withdrawal from it on the fifth of August, 1880. The master found against this contention, but exceptions to his report were sustained in the court below, and a decree was entered dismissing the bill. The single question presented is, whether Ambrose McConomy withdrew from the firm on the day and year aforesaid. It is a question…
2Cited by5 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Town of Stuntz v. City of ChisholmSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1937
- DeWitt v. DeWittSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
- Grauel v. WolfeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
- Dillingham v. MoranCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1900
- Rosenthal's EstatePennsylvania Orphans' Court, Philadelphia County · 1939