From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Thatcher v. Snyder

Appellate Court of Illinois, First District
Jan 22, 1941
308 Ill. App. 325 (Ill. App. Ct. 1941)

Summary

holding that a partnership was illegal where one partner was not licensed as a funeral director

Summary of this case from In re S a Restaurant Corp.

Opinion

Gen. No. 41,389. (Abstract of Decision.)

Opinion filed January 22, 1941

PARTNERSHIP, § 2undertaking firm, one partner not licensed. In action for accounting, lower court improperly found that a partnership to engage in the undertaking business existed between plaintiff and defendant, where evidence showed that defendant was not a licensed embalmer or funeral director, yet he performed such services, and he could not contend that by buying an old established undertaking business he continued that partnership, so as not to require a license.

See Callaghan's Illinois Digest, same topic and section number.

Appeal from Circuit Court of Cook county; Hon. PHILIP J. FINNEGAN, presiding.

Decree reversed and suit dismissed. Heard in third division, first district, this court at October term, 1940.

Kotin Gainer, for appellant;

James B. Cashin, of counsel;

Frederick W. Turner, Jr., and Avern B. Scolnik, for appellee;

Frederick W. Turner, Jr., of counsel.


"Not to be published in full." Opinion filed January 22, 1941.


Summaries of

Thatcher v. Snyder

Appellate Court of Illinois, First District
Jan 22, 1941
308 Ill. App. 325 (Ill. App. Ct. 1941)

holding that a partnership was illegal where one partner was not licensed as a funeral director

Summary of this case from In re S a Restaurant Corp.
Case details for

Thatcher v. Snyder

Case Details

Full title:Allen L. Thatcher, Appellant, v. Oscar Snyder, Appellee

Court:Appellate Court of Illinois, First District

Date published: Jan 22, 1941

Citations

308 Ill. App. 325 (Ill. App. Ct. 1941)
31 N.E.2d 333

Citing Cases

Searles v. Haynes

It is a general rule that courts will not aid either party 5. to an illegal agreement where a partnership is…

In re S a Restaurant Corp.

The plaintiff's notion of a joint venture would contravene N.J.S.A. § 33:1-26 by giving a creditor rights in…