Kellogg v. Griswold
Supreme Court of Vermont
This was an action of assumpsit. Plea, non assumpsit. At the April term of the county court, by the consent of the parties, the cause was referred, and the parties were to have the benefit of all questions of law, arising upon the hearing before the referee.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit. Plea, non assumpsit. At the April term of the county court, by the consent of the parties, the cause was referred, and the parties were to have the benefit of all questions of law, arising upon the hearing before the referee. At a subsequent term of the county court, the referee reported that the parties appeared before him, on the 26th of May, 1838, and that the plaintiff gave in evidence a paper and written contract, of which the following is a copy :— “ Calculation. “ Say $1000 will purchase, at 16 cents, lbs. 6250 Add for increase in tanning 1-4, 1562 7812…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Williams, Ch. J.
— But one question is presented in the case, that is, whether the plaintiff can maintain this action of assumpsit. The referee decided that the claims of the. parties could not be adjusted in this action of assumpsit, on the ground that they were partners. The decision was correct if they were partners inter se, as the respective claims of partners must be adjusted in the action of account or a bill in equity.
In a partnership, the parties are tenants in common of the joint stock and effects, and mutually participate in profit and loss.…
2Cited by9 opinions
- C. E. Johnson & Co. v. MarshSupreme Court of Vermont · 1940
- Houghton v. GrimesSupreme Court of Vermont · 1926
- New England Acceptance Corp. v. NicholsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1939
- Chapman, Lord, Wright & Co. v. Devereux & NoyesSupreme Court of Vermont · 1860
- Duryea v. WhitcombSupreme Court of Vermont · 1858
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.