Cases Argued and Determined in the Court of Common Pleas; With Tables of the Names of the Cases Argued and Cited, and of the Principal Matters. [1840-1844] Volume 5

Cases Argued and Determined in the Court of Common Pleas; With Tables of the Names of the Cases Argued and Cited, and of the Principal Matters. [1840-1844] Volume 5

List price: US$34.70

Currently unavailable

Add to wishlist

AbeBooks may have this title (opens in new window).

Try AbeBooks

Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1845 edition. Excerpt: ... defendant as a partner at the time these goods were supplied, if he cannot be held liable under the act of parliament, which, it is clear, he cannot. Tindal C.J. I do not see why the act is not to be appealed to, notwithstanding the company had not put themselves in a situation to render its provisions available. ErskineJ. You must go the length of contending that there was no evidence for the jury. It is not denied that the defendant was a party to the obtaining of the act; and if it had been shewn that the company had carried on business under the patents it might have been evidence. But the act was procured for a particular purpose, namely, to buy the patents, and the defendant can only be held responsible for things done in pursuance of the act. It is clear, that if the directors had done something not warranted by the act, the defendant would not be liable. 7Y/2dal C. J. Who do you say should have been sued for this tallow? The party who ordered it. It is contended that at that time the defendant was not a partner at all. rTindal C. J. The tallow was ordered for the machinery. But the patents had not been purchased. Maule J. Suppose they had not, do you contend that their purchase was a condition precedent lo carrying on the company? You assume that till the patents are bought the company cannot be sued, but there is nothing to that effect in the act. The third section seems to contemplate that some time may elapse before the patents are purchased. Erskine J. Was not the deed of settlement, reciting that the company had taken premises, erected machinery &c, coupled with the fact as shewn by the deed of contract that the defendant was a party to the obtaining of the act, evidence of his being a partner? The deed of settlement, contains...show more

Product details

  • Paperback | 268 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 14mm | 485g
  • Rarebooksclub.com
  • Miami Fl, United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 1236604121
  • 9781236604125