Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Sorted by: old Year: 1889 Page 1 of about 4 results (0.093 seconds)

Apr 22 1889 (FN)

Kilbourn Vs. Sunderland

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Apr-22-1889

..... washington by way of investment and speculation. hallet kilbourn, james m. latta, and john f. olmstead were carrying on business at that time in washington as real estate agents, in partnership, under the firm name of kilbourn & latta, and they were employed as their agents by sunderland, hillyer, and stewart. within a period of a few weeks, sunderland, hillyer, and stewart ..... case. where a party injured by fraud is in ignorance of its existence, the duty to commence proceedings arises only upon discovery, and mere submission to an injury after the act inflicting it is completed page 130 u. s. 519 cannot generally, and in the absence of other circumstances, take away a right of action unless such acquiescence continues for the ..... their purchase, it is difficult to see upon what ground they can recover here. the relations between the parties were such that kilbourn & latta should have disclosed that they were acting as principals in this sale, but the complainants suffered no pecuniary loss for want of such disclosure, since they took the property at their own price. their remedy, if they ..... . when a party injured by fraud is in ignorance of its existence, the duty to commence proceedings arises only upon its discovery, and mere submission to any injury after the act inflicting it is completed cannot generally, and in the absence of other circumstances, take away a right of action unless such acquiescence continues for the period limited by the statute .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 14 1889 (PC)

Tukaram Anant Joshi, a Lunatic by His Next Friend Bhikaji Ramachandra ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jan-14-1889

Reported in : (1889)ILR13Bom656

..... accepted as a clear indication of the view in which courts of equity in england regard suits like the present. other cases--e.g., trusts and partnerships--stand on other grounds, people of unsound mind stand in frequent need of protection. the reasons why the next friend may sue in the court of chancery ..... . no other authority has been cited on this point before us. we have thought it right, however, to refer to some of those reported in the indian and the english' books. in uma sundari dasi v. ramji haldar i.l.r. 7 cal. 242 it was laid down that a man not yet ..... lord justice james' observations on the care and protection afforded by the court to the lunatic and all his affairs apply equally to the district court acting under act xxxv of 1858. the manager has to get the sanction, of the district court for sales and mortgages and for leases exceeding five years. inventories ..... friend not having obtained a certificate until after the institution of the suit?' the assistant judge found that bhikaji did not apply to the district court, under act xxxv of 1858, until after the 20th january, 1885, the day on which the subordinate judge, after having recorded all the evidence and heading the ..... admitted that on the 12th march, 1885, tukaram was adjudged to be of unsound mind, and bhikaji was appointed manager of his estate, under section 9 of act xxxv of 1858. section 14 declares that, with certain exceptions, which it is unnecessary to notice here, such a manager 'may exercise the same powers in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 18 1889 (FN)

Rude Vs. Westcott

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Mar-18-1889

..... of an alleged license to english & over. the complainant westcott testifies that they continued to pay as long as they were in partnership, but how much, or how long that partnership continued, does not appear. and mr. over, a member of that firm, does page 130 u. s. 165 not recollect ..... , allowing, and confirming, and agreeing from time to time, and all times hereafter, to ratify, allow, and confirm, as good and valid, all and whatsoever the acts, matters, and things which my said attorneys or their substitute shall lawfully do, or cause to be done, in and about the premises, by virtue of these presents." ..... said attorneys shall deem proper and reasonable, . . . and generally to do and perform, and execute in my name as aforesaid, all and whatever other acts, matters, and things that they may deem expedient and requisite, or may be advised to do in and about the premises, as fully and effectually, ..... been, or hereafter may be, granted, reissued, renewed, or extended. i hereby further agree to sign such lawful papers and do such lawful acts as may be the counsel learned in law of the said west and westcott be deemed necessary or expedient in order to obtain an extension or ..... states without the consent or license of the complainants and in infringement of their patents, and that the defendants are still engaged in such unlawful acts. the complainants therefore pray that the defendants may, upon their best knowledge and information, answer as to the matters alleged and be compelled .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 23 1889 (FN)

Sugg Vs. Thornton

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Dec-23-1889

..... of testimony in the district court upon the question whether the signature of e. c. sugg & bro. to the note sued upon was an authorized partnership act. this was a question of fact simply, determined against the plaintiffs in error in the district court, and that determination affirmed by the supreme court of ..... j. d. sugg was without authority and a nullity," but there was no error assigned that the district court had no jurisdiction of the co-partnership of e. c. sugg & bro. as the supreme court of the state was only authorized to review the decision of the trial court for errors ..... the citation has been served upon some of such partners but not upon all, judgment may be rendered page 132 u. s. 526 therein against such partnership and against the partners actually served, but no personal judgment or execution shall be awarded against those not served." 1 sayles texas civil statutes, 417, 418 ..... process upon a nonresident or an absent defendant ( 1230) are not repugnant to the constitution of the united states. a judgment in texas against a partnership, and against one member of it upon whom process has been served, no process having been served upon another member who is nonresident and absent, ..... and iker sugg were one and the same person, who, with e. c. sugg, composed the partnership of e. c. sugg & bro.; that e. c. sugg & bro. owned property in texas, wyoming, and the indian territory of the value of about a million dollars, and were attempting to dispose of their property with .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //