Block v. Admr., Unemployment Comp. Act
Connecticut Superior Court
1Opinion of the CourtComley, J.
The existence of a partnership relation is an ultimate conclusion to be drawn by the trier from all the subordh nate facts. Hotchkiss v. DeVita, 103 Conn. 436, 448.
It cannot be said that any one fact is determinative of the relationship, the essential question being whether, upon all the facts, “such a relation exists between them [the partners] that each is as to all the others, in respect to some business, both principal and agent.” Morgan v. Farrel, 58 Conn. 413, 422; Samstag & Hilder Bros. v. Ottenheimer, 90 Conn. 475, 478.
Where the parties are closely related, as in this case, “acts and…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Morgan v. FarrelSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1890
- Jenkins v. ReichertSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1939
- Hotchkiss v. DevitaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1925
- Samstag Hilder Brothers v. OttenheimerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1916
- Landow Co., Inc. v. MaisanoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1934
3Cited by2 opinions
- Paollela v. PaollelaConnecticut Superior Court · 1991
- Buonome v. Boni, No. Cv90307300 (Nov. 5, 1993)Connecticut Superior Court · 1993