Barkley v. Beckwith — 90 A.D. 570

Majority

p. 570

John W. D. Barkley, Respondent, v. Clinton Beckwith, Appellant, Impleaded with Ray B. Lewis, Defendant.

Headnote

Partnei'ship—liability -of one partner who, after the dissolution of the jh'm, permits his former 'copartner to make use of the firm letter heading.

The fact that after the dissolution of a partnership one of the former partners knowingly permits the other partner to use in his correspondence letter heads of the partnership, in which the first-mentioned partner is designated as a member of the partnership, will not charge such first-mentioned partner with liability for goods furnished to the other partner, after the' dissolution of the partnership, by a corporation which has never dealt with the partnership.

Appeal by the defendant, Clinton Beckwith, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiff, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Rensselaer on the 16th day of October, 1902, upon the verdict .of a jury, and also from ail order entered in said clerk’s office on the 21st day of October, 1902, denying the said defendant’s motion for a new trial made upon the minutes.

Charles D. Thomas, for the appellant.

Warren McConihe and John B. Holmes, for the respondent.

The action is to recover the value of certain valves claimed to have been furnished by the plaintiff’s assignor, the Mohawk and Hudson Manufacturing Company, to the defendants Lewis and Beckwith as copartners.

The appellant Beckwith had been a partner with Lewis in the installation of a water system at Mount Kisco. During the continuance of that partnership letter heads were printed and used, reading, as follows: “ R. B. Lewis, Clinton Beckwith. R. B. Lewis & Co., Herkimer, N. Y., General Contractors. Waterworks, Sewers, Dams, Foundations, etc.” After the completion of the Mount Kisco contract, Lewis opened an account with. plaintiff’s assignor and directed that the goods be shipped to him at another place. The first installment was shipped to him individually, and thereafter they were shipped to R. B. Lewis &" Co., but it was not shown that Beckwith knew that the goods were so consigned.

p. 571

The only evidence tending to charge appellant Beckwith as;copartner was that he knew that Lewis was using the old stationery in his correspondence and permitted him to do so. The plaintiff’s assignor had not dealt with the old partnership, but opened its account after it was in fact closed. The permitting of the use of the stationery was not such an act as estopped the appellant from denying the partnership, or constituted him a partner as to the vendors. Nor was there any other evidence in the case which had that effect. The defendant’s motion for a nonsuit should have been granted, and failing to do this, the court should have granted his motion for a new trial.

The judgment should be reversed and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

All concurred.

Judgment and order reversed and new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide event.