Durden v. Dekle

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Durden v. Dekle

59 S.E. 315, 3 Ga. App. 97, 1907 Ga. App. LEXIS 565

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedNovember 25, 1907

Docket560

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 59 S.E. 315 (Durden v. Dekle) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Durden v. Dekle, 59 S.E. 315, 3 Ga. App. 97, 1907 Ga. App. LEXIS 565 (Ga. Ct. App. 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

Powell, J.

A contract of suretyship, guaranty, or accommodation indorsement is not within the legitimate business of an ordinary partnership; hence one partner has not the power to bind the partnership or the other partners by any such contract, without their consent. While the partners not originally bound may, in certain events, ratify the unauthorized acts of the other partner, no facts sufficient to supply the necessary elements of a ratification appear in the pi’esent case.

Judgment reversed.

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

Powell, J.

A contract of suretyship, guaranty, or accommodation indorsement is not within the legitimate business of an ordinary partnership; hence one partner has not the power to bind the partnership or the other partners by any such contract, without their consent. While the partners not originally bound may, in certain events, ratify the unauthorized acts of the other partner, no facts sufficient to supply the necessary elements of a ratification appear in the pi’esent case.

Judgment reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

59 S.E. 315, 3 Ga. App. 97, 1907 Ga. App. LEXIS 565, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/durden-v-dekle-gactapp-1907.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack