Houser & Bronson v. Riley
Supreme Court of Georgia
Partnership. Before Judge Cole. Houston Superior Court. May adjourned Term, 1870. This was assumpsit, by Riley as administrator of Riley, against Houser and Bronson for money had and received. Houser testified that he and Bronson were needing money, and trying to borrow it, and that he had some money which he had collected as agent for Riley, deceased, and put it into the firm business, placing it to the “ credit of the firm, upon its books.”
Read the full summary
Partnership. Before Judge Cole. Houston Superior Court. May adjourned Term, 1870. This was assumpsit, by Riley as administrator of Riley, against Houser and Bronson for money had and received. Houser testified that he and Bronson were needing money, and trying to borrow it, and that he had some money which he had collected as agent for Riley, deceased, and put it into the firm business, placing it to the “ credit of the firm, upon its books.” He said Bronson knew not how he got the money, at the time, but, upon being subsequently informed, expressed himself satisfied with the matter. Bronson…
1Opinion of the Court
McCay, Judge.
To have given the charge asked for would have been assuming that this money was loaned to one of the firm, of which there was no evidence. The party collecting the money testified that, having it in hand, as the agent of Riley, he loaned it to the firm, and there are two witnesses who testify that this money was used by the firm, knowing it was Riley’s money. Indeed, all parties admit that this was Riley’s money, and that it went to the use of the firm. Parties are bound to take notice of the ownership of property, if they are informed of the truth, and it is admitted here that,…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Cunningham v. Woodbridge & HarrimanSupreme Court of Georgia · 1886