Beach v. Hayward

10 Ohio St. 455
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided December 15, 1841·Published

Opinion

Lane, C. J.

It has been held that in the case of dormant partners, not privy to the contract, the other members of the firm may omit their names in an action. 1 Chitty’s Pl. 13. But this is an exception to the general rule requiring the suit to be brought in the name of the firm, or, in case of death, by the survivors. The application of the general rule, in cases like this, can work no injustice to the defendant. It is of no moment to him who sues, as his right of set-off is preserved. The suit is well brought.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Beach v. Hayward, 10 Ohio St. 455 (Ohio 1841).

10 Ohio St. 455 (Beach v. Hayward) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Clark v. Miller
4 Wend. 628 (New York Supreme Court, 1830)