Marquand v. President of New-York Manufacturing Co.
Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors
APPEAL from the Court of Chancery. The bill filed the 25th of May, 1815, by the respondents against the appellants, stated, among other things, that in the year 1813, the appellants agreed to enter into copartnership for the purpose of carrying on the business of watch-makers and jewellers, under the firm of Erastus Barton & Co., and written articles of co-partnership were executed by them on the 24th of January, 1814, which were set forth in the bill.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Court of Chancery. The bill filed the 25th of May, 1815, by the respondents against the appellants, stated, among other things, that in the year 1813, the appellants agreed to enter into copartnership for the purpose of carrying on the business of watch-makers and jewellers, under the firm of Erastus Barton & Co., and written articles of co-partnership were executed by them on the 24th of January, 1814, which were set forth in the bill. The appellant, Fitch, having become indebted to the respondents to a large amount, for money borrowed on endorsed notes, to secure the payment…
1Opinion of the CourtWoodworth, J.
The first question to be decided is, whether the legal effect of the assignment is such as to dissolve the partnership.
* Fitch may have violated his engagement with his partners, by transferring his interest, but we are not called on to express any opinion on that point. Third persons claim Fitch’s interest and property in the concern, and are entitled to receive it, if the partnership was at an end.
It is well settled in England, that an act of bankruptcy is a dissolution of partnership ; this is by reason of the assignment, which severs the interest of the bankrupt, by operation of law.…
2Cited by24 opinions
- Meinhard v. SalmonNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Karrick v. HannamanSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Merrick v. BrainardNew York Supreme Court · 1860
- Kennedy v. . PorterNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
- Monroe v. HamiltonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1877
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.