Fraser v. Spofford

5 Blackf. 207, 1839 Ind. LEXIS 100
Indiana Supreme Court·Decided November 22, 1839·Published

Opinion

Sullivan, J.

Debt by Paul Spofford, Thomas Tiletson, and Moses Kimball, against J. G. Fraser and others. The declaration alleges that the defendants, on, &c., made their certain promissory note payable to the plaintiffs by the name and description of Spofford, Tiletson, fy Co. Plea, nil debent. On the trial, a note signed G. Fraser fy Co., per G. W. Smith,” payable to Spofford, Tiletson, fy Co., was all the evidence introduced by the plaintiffs in support of their right to recover. The testimony was objected to but the objection was overruled. Judgment for the plaintiffs.

This Court has decided, that where certain persons declare upon a note payable to a firm, and describe themselves as [208] co-partners trading under that firm, and allege that the promise was made to them by the co-partnership name, it is equivalent to an averment that they constitute the firm, and they must prove the averment, or show their interest in the subject-matter of the suit. Fletcher v. Dana et al. 4 Blackf. 377. If they fail to do so, the evidence will not warrant a judgment in their favour. The Court, therefore, erred in giving judgment for the plaintiffs in the present cas.e, without proof that they were the persons to whom the promise was made

Footnotes

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

Fraser v. Spofford, 5 Blackf. 207, 1839 Ind. LEXIS 100 (Ind. 1839).

5 Blackf. 207 (Fraser v. Spofford) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Fletcher v. Dana
4 Blackf. 377 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1837)