Kelvinator Sales Corp. v. Whitney
This text of 248 N.W. 572 (Kelvinator Sales Corp. v. Whitney) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Plaintiff’s assignor sold and delivered merchandise on an order signed, — “Detroit Community Mkts. (Seal) (Purchaser’s signature) By Guy R. Loomis. (Partner, or official title, if company).”
In this suit for the price, the declaration in several counts is for recovery against Whitney as the proprietor, against Loomis as the proprietor, and against both as partners, trading under the assumed name. In a trial without a jury, there was judgment against Loomis alone. Plaintiff has appealed.
*134 The decision is in effect that Loomis was sole proprietor, and that Whitney was neither sole proprietor nor partner. Loomis testified he was sole proprietor. Whitney denied he was either proprietor or partner. An agent of a credit bureau contradicted Whitney. There was other testiinony of activities of the defendants in respect of the business. But on review of the case we cannot find the decision of the trial judge to be against the weight of the evidence. Disposing of the case upon the facts renders discussion of law unnecessary.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
248 N.W. 572, 263 Mich. 133, 1933 Mich. LEXIS 1114, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kelvinator-sales-corp-v-whitney-mich-1933.