Legal Opinion

Gaston v. Kellogg

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided October 15, 1886PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Appeal from OJiariton Circuit Court. — Hon. Cr. D. Burgess, Judge. (1) This court will review the evidence and findings of the referee, as the suit is of an equitable character, to settle the co-partnership affairs. Hodges v. Black, 76 Mo. 537; Holt v. Simmons, 16 Mo.

Read the full summary

Appeal from OJiariton Circuit Court. — Hon. Cr. D. Burgess, Judge. (1) This court will review the evidence and findings of the referee, as the suit is of an equitable character, to settle the co-partnership affairs. Hodges v. Black, 76 Mo. 537; Holt v. Simmons, 16 Mo. App. 97. (2; Ordinarily, a partner cannot recover of the firm compensation for his services rendered the same, unless there is a contract therefor, express or implied, or an agreement for such compensation; the burden, of course, being on the partner, thus claiming, to show his right to the same. Lee v. Dams, 70 Ind. 464 ;…

1Opinion of the CourtNorton, C. J.

This is a suit instituted in 1881'for dissolution of a partnership and an accounting. The petition states that, in July, 1875, the parties, by written contract, entered into partnership under the name and style of “Chariton County Mining Company,” and the partners purchased a mine in Summit county, Colorado, and that, by employment by said defendants, as such company, plaintiff began work in said mine, known as the “Battel Tunnel Mine,” in said county, on August 9, 1875, and continued to thus work until November 9, 1876 ; that his labor and services therein were reasonably worth five dollars…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Reinecke v. JodSupreme Court of Missouri · 1874

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. BaileySupreme Court of Missouri · 1887
  2. Maloney v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1894
  3. Owsley v. Owsley, 4889 (mo.app. 1-15-1931)Missouri Court of Appeals · 1931

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API