Millard v. Adams
New York City Court
1Opinion of the Court
Clement, Ch. J.
The plaintiffs were copartners in business, and creditors of the firm of Kirkland & Co. and brought this action on the theory that the defendant was a partner in such firm. The plaintiffs claim that William Kirkland and the defendant were partners under the name of Kirkland & Adams, Kirkland & Co. or William Kirkland & Co. The complaint was dismissed at the trial at the end of plaintiffs’ case, and this appeal was taken.
While the testimony tending to show that defendant was a partner is weak, nevertheless we think that it was sufficient to put the defendant on her defense. The…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Eisenlord v. . ClumNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
3Cited by3 opinions
- Estate of McCarthyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
- Bonazzi v. FortneySupreme Court of Vermont · 1920
- Newitt v. NewittAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1953