Speak v. Kinsey
Speak v. Kinsey
Opinion of the Court
In this case a writ of garnishment was sued out against Speak, at the instance of Kinsey, administrator of
The plaintiff contends that the judgment should only have been for half the amount, the partnership between Speak and Willard having been dissolved ; and that it was a partnership » debt. We answer, that the former partners are both jointly and severally liable for the whole partnership debt; and that the plaintiff in error made the joint answer of himself and Willard on a former garnishment a part of his answer. He took no exception, in the Court below, as to his liability. It would not, perhaps, bind Willard, if he should be able to show, in any future proceedings, that he had a meritorious defence; but Speak, who answered, cannot now set up such defence, unless Jhe could show mistake or fraud upon him in making his an* swers.
There is another objection better taken. The judgment of the Court should have been in favor of Speak for his costs, and it should have been, when paid, a bar to a recovery by Butter-worth of the amount condemned in the hands of Speak and Willard. For this error the judgment must be reformed, or, in
Reversed and reformed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- John Speak v. H. M. Kinsey
- Status
- Published