TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Weiland v. Sell

John J. Weiland v. C. C. Sell

Weiland v. Sell, 109 P. 771 (Kan. 1910)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of Kansas · State Highest Courts
Decided
July 9, 1910
Docket
No. 16,620
Citations
109 P. 77183 Kan. 2291910 Kan. LEXIS 505
Disposition
Affirmed.
Syllabus
.Partnership — Proof of Existence. The evidence held not to show the existence of a partnership.
Summary
Appeal from Lyon district 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

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

Per Curiam:

The demurrer to the evidence was properly overruled. There was no defect of parties. The defendant relies upon Railway Co. v. Hucklebridge, 62 Kan. 506 , where it was held that the plaintiff could not recover in the action because it appeared that the claim sued upon belonged to a partnership. The controlling fact in that case was the agreement between the plaintiff and the witness to share the profits and the losses, which it was held constituted them partners. In this case the evidence clearly shows that there was no partnership, but merely an arrangement for a division of the net commission on one class of sales, in lieu of office rent and advertising. The case falls within the principle declared in Shepard v. Pratt, 16 Kan. 209 , that a sharing of the profits is not always conclusive evidence of a partnership. That circumstance here is overborne by other controlling facts.

The judgment is affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

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

1914: 11919: 11946: 11956: 11957: 119142026peak 1914 · 1

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 2

DepthCaseCited by
Shepard v. Pratt, 16 Kan. 209 (1876) 28
Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. Hucklebridge, 64 P. 58 (Kan. 1901) 15

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