Lemon v. Fox
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Error from Nemaha District Court. Action brought by Fox against Lemon and Hosea. Trial at October Term, 1877, of the district court, and findings and judgment for Fox. Defendants bring the case here. The facts are fully stated in the opinion, infra. While transacting the business of the firm, Mather was also carrying on business on his own account.
Read the full summary
Error from Nemaha District Court. Action brought by Fox against Lemon and Hosea. Trial at October Term, 1877, of the district court, and findings and judgment for Fox. Defendants bring the case here. The facts are fully stated in the opinion, infra. While transacting the business of the firm, Mather was also carrying on business on his own account. Even if he were authorized to bind the firm by his individual signature, such an instrument as the certificate in suit would be prima facie an individual obligation. This presumption could only be overcome by proof, on the part of the plaintiff…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Brewer, J.:
In April, 1873, Milo E. Mather came to Sabetha, Nemaha county, Kansas, and engaged in banking, under the name and style of the “Sabetha Exchange Bank,” putting into his business a capital of about $11,000, and continued in business alone under that name until the first day of November, 1875, when he entered into "a copartnership with plaintiffs in error to continue, the same business at the same place and under the same name. Lemon and Hosea resided at St. Joseph, Missouri, and, by the terms of the co-partnership agreement, were not'…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Crane v. ChouteauSupreme Court of Kansas · 1878
3Cited by3 opinions
- Mills v. RiggleSupreme Court of Kansas · 1911
- Smith v. Stock Yards Loan Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1939
- First National Bank v. JosefoffIndiana Court of Appeals · 1914