FI Du Pont, Glore Forgan & Company v. Silliman

310 A.2d 128, 1973 Del. LEXIS 241
CourtSupreme Court of Delaware
DecidedSeptember 6, 1973
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 310 A.2d 128 (FI Du Pont, Glore Forgan & Company v. Silliman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Delaware primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
FI Du Pont, Glore Forgan & Company v. Silliman, 310 A.2d 128, 1973 Del. LEXIS 241 (Del. 1973).

Opinion

*129 PER CURIAM:

For the reasons stated in the careful opinion below (Del.Super., 302 A.2d 327), we agree that the plaintiff may maintain this action against F. I. duPont, Glore For-gan & Company, a limited partnership, in its common name as a partnership entity, without joinder of individual partners.

It is to be noted that any doubt as to the meaning of 10 Del.C. § 3904 in this regard has now been removed by the July 1, 1973 amendment thereto, - Del.L.Ch. -. *

The judgment below is affirmed.

*

10 Del.C. § 3904, ns amended, provides:

“§ 3904. Suits and Judgments by and Against Unincorporated Associations
“An unincorporated association of persons, including a partnership, using a common name may sue and be sued in such common name and a judgment recovered therein shall be a lien like other judgments, and may be executed upon by levy, seizure and sale of the personal and real estate of such association, and also that of the persons composing such association in the same manner with respect to them ns if they had been made parties defendant by their individual names. Satisfaction thereof may also be obtained by attachment process.”

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
310 A.2d 128, 1973 Del. LEXIS 241, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fi-du-pont-glore-forgan-company-v-silliman-del-1973.