PUTNAM & Another v. INGRAHAM
Supreme Court of the United States
IN ERROR TO THE CIKCUIT COURT OE THE UNITED STATES EOE THE DISTRICT OE CONNECTICUT. This was a writ of error for the- review of an order of the Circuit Court remanding a suit to a State court.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR TO THE CIKCUIT COURT OE THE UNITED STATES EOE THE DISTRICT OE CONNECTICUT. This was a writ of error for the- review of an order of the Circuit Court remanding a suit to a State court. The súit was brought in the Superior Court of the County of Hartford, Connecticut, by George E. Ingraham, the defendant- in error, a citizen of Connecticut, against N. D. Putnam and Henry Earle, citizens of New York, and W. G. Morgan, a citizen of Connect- ■ icut, as partners in business under the name of Putnam, Earle & Co., to recover a balance claimed to be due from the - partnership on an account…
1Opinion of the Court
Mi?.. Chief Justice Waite
delivered the opinion of the court. After stating the facts as above recited, he continued:
We are unable to distinguish this case materially from that of The Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co. v. Ide, just decided. The suit is brought against all the defendants jointly to recover upon what are alleged to be their joint promises and undertakings. The defendants-, who are not citizens of Connecticut-, have filed a separate answer in which they deny ■their liability altogether, and claim besides that, if liable at all on part of the account sued for, it is not jointly…
2Cited by26 opinions
- Starin v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Wilson v. Oswego TownshipSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Graves v. CorbinSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Sloane v. AndersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Fidelity Insurance v. HuntingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.