TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Ransom v. Pomeroy

Ransom v. Pomeroy, Administrator

Ransom v. Pomeroy, 5 Blackf. 383 (1840)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Indiana Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
November 24, 1840
Judges
Blackford
Citations
5 Blackf. 3831840 Ind. LEXIS 84
Headnotes
If two partners bo indebted for goods sold and delivered, and one die in the lifetime of the other, the administrator of the deceased partner may, by statute, bo sued at law for the debt.
Summary
ERROR to the Marshall Circuit Court.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Blackford

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Blackford, J.

Assumpsit. The declaration states that Evan B. Hobson and Niles Gregory, trading in the name of Hobson & Gregory, .were indebted to the plaintiff for goods sold and delivered in the sum of 300 dollars, and in consideration thereof promised to pay, &c.; that Hobson afterwards died, and the defendant is his administrator, Gregory being still living; that payment has not been made, &c. General demurrer to the declaration and judgment for the defendant.

The defendant contends that this suit could only be sustained against the surviving partner; and that is, no doubt, the common law. Bac. Abr. tit. Obi. D. 4. But our statute has changed the law on this subject. On the death of Hob-son, the plaintiff' had his choice either to sue Gregory or the administrator of Hobson. The circumstance that this is an unwritten contract does not, we think, make any difference. The defendant is the representative of Hobson, who was *384 jointly bound with Gregory for the payment of a debt; and to such a case the statute applies. R. S. 1838, p. 358.

J. B. Niles, for the plaintiff. J. S. Newman, for the defendant.

Per Curiam.

The judgment is reversed with costs, to be levied, &c. Cause remanded, &c.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1844–1845: 11864–1865: 118442026peak 1844 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Braxton v. State ex rel. Albert25 Ind. 82 (1865)
  2. Parker v. Miller7 Blackf. 150 (1844)

Most recent

  1. Braxton v. State ex rel. Albert25 Ind. 82 (1865)
  2. Parker v. Miller7 Blackf. 150 (1844)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list