Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

22 R.I. 376

48 A 141

Atherton v. Goldsmith

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Decided February 1, 1901

Supreme Court of Rhode Island · decided 1901-02-01

<p>(1) Assumpsit. Acaowut. Partnership.</p> <p>A. and B. agreed to share the gains and losses of a particular adventure. A. furnished a certain sum of money and loaned B. an equal amount to enable him to furnish his share of the capital Held, that assumpsit would lie in favor of A. to recover the money loaned.</p>

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently December 1924

1 state decisions

Relies on Fry v. Potter · Dowling v. Clarke

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Heard on p'etition of plaintiff for a new trial, and new… · Decided 1901-02-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1 The nonsuit in this case was erroneously granted.

¶2 In Dowling v. Clarke, 13 R. I. 134, the claim was for an unascertained balance claimed to be due on a partnership account, and for this it was held that assumpsit would not lie.

¶3 (1) In Fry v. Potter, 12 R. I. 542, however, a case like the present one, it was held that assumpsit would lie, because, there being no general copartnership, but only an agreement to share the gains and losses of a particular adventure, and *377 nothing outstanding to be adjusted, the transaction was closed and the losses ascertained.

Jacob W. Mathewson, and George T. Broivn, for plaintiff. Edward D. Bassett, for defendant.

¶4 This case is even stronger, from the plaintiff’s testimony that the money sued for was a loan to the defendant to enable him to the speculation of purchasing options on land.

¶5 Petition for new trial granted.

/22/ri/376 · .json · Public domain