Argall v. Smith
Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors
Oh error from the supreme court. The defendant in error as administratrix of John G. Smith deceased, brought assumpsit for goods sold by her intestate, against the plaintiffs in error; and upon non-assumpsit pleaded, the jury found a special verdict, upon which the court below rendered judgment for the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Oh error from the supreme court. The defendant in error as administratrix of John G. Smith deceased, brought assumpsit for goods sold by her intestate, against the plaintiffs in error; and upon non-assumpsit pleaded, the jury found a special verdict, upon which the court below rendered judgment for the plaintiff. A statement of the facts found by the verdict together with the opinion of the court may be seen in the report of the case in 6 Hill, 479. It is sufficient to state here that the question was whether the defendants in the court below were general partners, they having signed a…
1Opinion of the Court
Spencer, Senator.
This case turns upon a very narrow question—whether both defendants are to be deemed general partners. This depends upon the fact whether or not the plaintiffs in error, in forming their partnership, have complied with the terms prescribed by the statute authorizing the formation of special or limited partnerships. (1 R. S. 764.) If they failed, it was in not complying with the requirement of the ninth sec*436tion of the act. This section prescribes that “the partners shall publish' the terms of the partnership when registered for at least six weeks immediately after such…
2Cited by17 opinions
- Giles v. VetteSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- President & Directors of the Manhattan Co v. LaimbeerNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
- Henkel v. HeymanIllinois Supreme Court · 1878
- Buck v. . AlleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1895
- Andrews v. SchottSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1848
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.