New York Supreme Court, 1808

Hackley v. Patrick

Hackley v. Patrick
New York Supreme Court · Decided November 15, 1808
3 Johns. 536

Counsel

Mulligan, for the defendants,, Colden, contra,

Hackley v. Patrick

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

This is a clear case. After a dissolution of a copartnership, the power of one party to bind the others, wholly ceases. There is no reason why his acknowledgment of an account should bind his copartners, any more than his giving a promissory note in the name of the firm, or any' other act. The plaintiff ought to have produced'furthef evidence of the debt; the acknowledgment of 'Hastie alone was not sufficient to charge Patrick.

There must be a new trial; with costs to abide the event of the suit.

New trial granted.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.