Ensign v. Wands
New York Supreme Court
This was an action of assumpsit, for goods sold and. delivered. The defendant pleaded in abatement that the plaintiff, and G. R. Webster, and G; Webster, were partners in trade at the time of making the supposed contract, and that the promises charged in the declaration, were made by the defendant to the said partners jointly, and not to the plaintiff severally.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit, for goods sold and. delivered. The defendant pleaded in abatement that the plaintiff, and G. R. Webster, and G; Webster, were partners in trade at the time of making the supposed contract, and that the promises charged in the declaration, were made by the defendant to the said partners jointly, and not to the plaintiff severally. On this plea issue was" joined, and the cause was tried before Mr. Chief Justice Lansing, at the Albanycircuit, July Jast, It appeared in evidence, that the goods for which this action was brought, consisted of several quantities of…
1Opinion of the Court
Per'Curiam.
The partnership between the plaintiff and *212the Websteirs was special. As between themselves it was certainly competent to make it so. The moment a sale was made by one of them he immediately became- chargeable with the amount, and the profits accrued with certainty to the others, who were ho longer subject to the general risk of loss. The defendant understood this to he the course of their dealings, or' at, least requested that the sales to him might be considered as made with the plaintiff solely, to which the latter assented. It was; therefore, not a sale as from joint partners,…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Baxter v. . ClarkSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1843
- Johnson v. HawsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1900