Champlin v. Tilley
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Connecticut
THE plaintiff, in his declaration, stated, “ that at New-Port, the defendants, by said William Tilley, purchased af said deceased a quantity of hemp, to be manufactured . at their rope factory m A cw-London, on a credit of four months, and to secure payment thereof, the defendants, at said Mew-Port, by said William Tilley, one oí said firm and company, and then joint mechanic and trader with said James Tilley as aforesaid, made, executed, and to said deceased, then in full…
Read the full summary
THE plaintiff, in his declaration, stated, “ that at New-Port, the defendants, by said William Tilley, purchased af said deceased a quantity of hemp, to be manufactured . at their rope factory m A cw-London, on a credit of four months, and to secure payment thereof, the defendants, at said Mew-Port, by said William Tilley, one oí said firm and company, and then joint mechanic and trader with said James Tilley as aforesaid, made, executed, and to said deceased, then in full life, delivered a certain writing or promissory note, in the words and figures following, viz. “We, William Tilley and…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
The book must go to the jury, as it has been proved, and indeed conceded, that James Tilley made a few entries in it. The jury are to decide Whether the book, as it is, amounts to any proof of partnership.
The jury found a verdict for the defendant.
His counsel then moved, that judgment should be entered up for both defendants, though one of them had been defaulted.
The Court said, this was the correct mode of pro-seeding; for if the jury had found, that one defendant assumed and promised, and the other did not. iudsr- . , , ,. , ’ J b ment must have been entered up for both, the…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Borden v. BordenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1809
- Hobart v. Connecticut Turnpike Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1842
- McDonald v. ColeWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1899
- West Winsted Savings Bank & Building Ass'n v. FordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1858
- Litchfield Bank v. ChurchSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1860
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.