Legal Opinion

Boeklen v. . Hardenbergh

New York Court of Appeals

Decided February 2, 1875PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

After the judge had charged the jury, and they had retired to consider their verdict, they returned into court, and asked instructions as to two propositions, one of which was, "whether the fact, that the defendant Hardenbergh owned an interest in the adventure for which the work was performed, made him liable." The judge said in answer, that the fact that he owned an interest in the patent did not necessarily make him a partner of Smith, and liable to the plaintiff. The instruction given was correct. Joint ownership with Smith in the patent, did not alone make them partners. (Porter v.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Porter v. M'Clure & TourtellotNew York Supreme Court · 1836
  2. Jones v. . OsgoodNew York Court of Appeals · 1852

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Cook v. PerryMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
  2. Reynolds v. Continental InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1877
  3. Allen v. HawleyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1932

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

Powered by the Exa API