Legal Opinion

Wenzel v. Murphy

New York Marine Court

Decided November 15, 1876Published

Motion for leave to discontinue without costs.

1Opinion of the CourtMcAdam, J.

The defendants were managing and running a business at Nos. 2, 4 and 6 Tompkins street, under the firm name of Murphy & Carpenter. Murphy signed the firm name to the note in suit, without disclosing the names of the members of the firm, and excuses such omission by saying that he was not specially called upon by the plaintiff to make such discovery. The plaintiff sued the defendants upon the note, and thereupon ascertained for the first time that the defendants were the mere superintendents of the business, while their respective wives were the actual owners of and business partners in the…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. De Barante v. . DeyermandNew York Court of Appeals · 1869
  2. Staiger v. SchultzNew York Court of Appeals · 1867
  3. Packard v. WoodNew York Supreme Court · 1864
  4. Honeywell v. BurnsNew York Supreme Court · 1828
  5. Taaks v. SchmidtNew York Supreme Court · 1860

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API