From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Turner v. Weston

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
May 24, 1892
31 N.E. 91 (N.Y. 1892)
Download
PDF
Check
Treatment

Summary

In Turner v. Weston, 133 N.Y. 650-654, it was said: "It is not important to define the precise legal relations which the plaintiff and defendants sustained to each other in the business. If not strictly a partnership it was certainly a joint enterprise, and the rights and obligations of the parties are to be determined and adjusted upon the rules and principles applicable to partnership relations."

Summary of this case from Doubleday, Page Co. v. Shumaker
See 1 Summary

Opinion

Argued April 22, 1892

Decided May 24, 1892

D.H. Bolles for appellants.

Roswell R. Moss for respondent.

O'BRIEN, J., reads for affirmance.

All concur.

Judgment affirmed.

Summaries of

Turner v. Weston

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
May 24, 1892
31 N.E. 91 (N.Y. 1892)

In Turner v. Weston, 133 N.Y. 650-654, it was said: "It is not important to define the precise legal relations which the plaintiff and defendants sustained to each other in the business. If not strictly a partnership it was certainly a joint enterprise, and the rights and obligations of the parties are to be determined and adjusted upon the rules and principles applicable to partnership relations."

Summary of this case from Doubleday, Page Co. v. Shumaker
Case details for

Turner v. Weston

Case Details

Full title:ALEXANDER S. TURNER, Respondent, v . WILLIAM W. WESTON et al., Appellants

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: May 24, 1892

Citations

31 N.E. 91 (N.Y. 1892)
31 N.E. 91
45 N.Y. St. Rptr. 301

Citing Cases

Doubleday, Page Co. v. Shumaker

See also Rider Life Raft Co. v. Roach, 97 N.Y. 378; Catskill Bank v. Gray, 14 Barb. 471-478. In Turner v.…

Compton v. Bowns

To enable us to determine whether, in denying the motions, the court below committed legal error, it is not…

3 Citing Cases