Smith v. Everett
This text of 126 Mass. 304 (Smith v. Everett) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Upon the allegations in the bill, which are admitted by the demurrer, the defendant, by false and fraudulent representations as to the extent of his business, induced the plaintiff to enter into a partnership with him for a definite period, which would make the plaintiff liable to creditors as a partner. Against such liability by reason of the defendant’s fraud, a court of law could afford the plaintiff no adequate remedy. Equity has therefore jurisdiction to order the partnership articles to be cancelled, and to restrain the defendant from using the plaintiff’s name as a partner; and, having obtained jurisdiction for that purpose, may administer complete relief in the same suit, by ordering the defendant to repay the sums advanced or expended by the plairitiff on account of the partner ship. Pillans v. Harkness, Colles, 442. Ex parte Broome, 1 Rose, 69. Rawlins v. Wickham, 3 DeG. & J. 304. Jauncey v. Knowles, 29 L. J. (N. S.) Ch. 95. Story Part. §§ 232, 285.
Decree affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
126 Mass. 304, 1879 Mass. LEXIS 243, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-everett-mass-1879.