Morris v. Jones & Spence

Superior Court of Delaware

Morris v. Jones & Spence

4 Del. 428

DecidedJuly 1, 1846

StatusPublished

This text of 4 Del. 428 (Morris v. Jones & Spence) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Delaware primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Morris v. Jones & Spence, 4 Del. 428 (Del. Ct. App. 1846).

Pincite

Opinion

The Court

charged,—1st. That the plaintiff could not recover on the special count on the single bill of Jones & Spence, because the bill being under seal was obligatory on Spence alone, and was not the deed of Jones; as Spence had no authority to bind his partner by such an instrument. 2d. That he could not recover on the count for money lent, because the taking the single.bill of Spence for the money' so lent, extinguished the remedy on the simple contract against the partners; and the plaintiff’s remedy was against Spence alone on the bill. Whereupon the plaintiff suffered a nonsuit.

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

The Court

charged,—1st. That the plaintiff could not recover on the special count on the single bill of Jones & Spence, because the bill being under seal was obligatory on Spence alone, and was not the deed of Jones; as Spence had no authority to bind his partner by such an instrument. 2d. That he could not recover on the count for money lent, because the taking the single.bill of Spence for the money' so lent, extinguished the remedy on the simple contract against the partners; and the plaintiff’s remedy was against Spence alone on the bill. Whereupon the plaintiff suffered a nonsuit.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 Del. 428, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morris-v-jones-spence-delsuperct-1846.