Lamb v. Irby Singleton and Co.

Decided May 15, 1811

Supreme Court of South Carolina · decided 1811-05-15

Assumpsit on a note of hand, tried before Grisike, J., in Sumter District Court. The defendants, Irby Singleton, and Richard Haynesworth, severed in their pleas of non assumpsit. It appeared in evidence, that the defendant had been partners in trade, under the firm of Irby Singleton & Co., but that the partnership was dissolved some lime before the note in question was given.

Relies on Jackson ex dem. Tibbits v. Williams · Sanford v. Mickles

Decided 1811-05-15

¶1Per curiam.

Smith, J.

¶2The partnership was indebted to the plaintiff, and he had, at all events, his remedy against both partners *491to be paid out of the partnership funds. It was not proved that he had particular notice of the dissolution of the copartnership. Justice has been done. It would answer no end of justice to turn the party round. See 1 H. Bl. 155. 1 Esp. Rep. 371.

Note. See Wats, on Partnership, 378. 4 Johns. 224. A pavtner cannot bind his copartner after dissolution of the partnership ¡and; with respect to antecedent debts contracted during the partnership, the -power to receive payment, and give discharges, rests on the same principle with that of joint obligees, or payees, of a note not otherwise connected as partners. 2 Johns. 300. 3 Esp. Cases, 108. 3 John. 536. After partnership dissolved, one partner cannot bind another.

¶3Motion rejected.