Carlton v. Grissom & Co.

26 S.E. 77, 98 Ga. 118
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedJanuary 20, 1896
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 26 S.E. 77 (Carlton v. Grissom & Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Carlton v. Grissom & Co., 26 S.E. 77, 98 Ga. 118 (Ga. 1896).

Opinion

Atkinson, Justice.

The official report states the facts.

1. The original declaration alleged a joint liability against the defendants, and it is not altogether certain that even as it stood, without amendment, it was not sufficient to charge the defendant Carlton as a partner with Storey. However that may be, it was sufficient to authorize an amendment alleging the joint liability to be that of partners; and the motion to strike the amendment as introducing new parties and a new and distinct cause of action, was properly overruled.

2. An actual contract by which a partnership is formed is not always essential to support the liability of one person as a partner with another. As to third persons, he may assume such a liability by inducing them to extend a credit upon the faith of representations made by him, either express or implied, to the effect that he was a partner and as such liable.

3. The evidence is clear and satisfactory as to the existence of the partnership in so far as that relation was necessary to sustain a liability to the person who brought [122]*122this action. It fully justified the instructions given to the jury as to the circumstances .under which one not actually a partner was nevertheless liable to third persons as such. These instructions as given were properly submitted to the jury, and the trial judge did not ©it in overruling the motion for a new trial. Judgment ■affirmed.

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

Related

Pope v. Triangle Chemical Co.
277 S.E.2d 758 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1981)
Smith v. Hornbuckle
232 S.E.2d 149 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1977)
Time Financial Services, Inc. v. Hewitt
228 S.E.2d 176 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1976)
Chambliss v. Hall
147 S.E.2d 334 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1966)
Coppedge v. Allen
177 S.E. 340 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1934)
Southern Cotton Oil Co. v. Brownlee
107 S.E. 355 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1921)
Becker v. Kenney
82 S.E. 936 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1914)
American Cotton College v. Atlanta Newspaper Union
74 S.E. 1084 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1912)
Mims v. Brook & Co.
59 S.E. 711 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1907)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
26 S.E. 77, 98 Ga. 118, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carlton-v-grissom-co-ga-1896.