Inmon v. Southwest Auto Supply, Inc., CA
| Decision Date | 30 April 1980 |
| Docket Number | No. CA,CA |
| Citation | 599 S.W.2d 420,268 Ark. 1140 |
| Parties | David E. INMON, Appellant, v. SOUTHWEST AUTO SUPPLY, INC., Appellee. 79-330. |
| Court | Arkansas Court of Appeals |
Patten, Brown, Leslie & Davidson by Charles Darwin Davidson, Little Rock, for appellant.
Curtis E. Rickard, Benton, for appellee.
David Inmon, appellant, invested money in Commercial Truck Refinishing, a partnership. Southwest Auto Supply, Inc. sued Inmon for collection of a debt in the amount of $3,493.69. The Court rendered judgment against Inmon in the amount of $2,944.16. Inmon appeals.
Doug B. Conners and David Inmon formed a partnership October 15, 1976. Inmon invested $15,000 cash and Conners invested $15,000 worth of property into the partnership. The partnership was terminated on January 28, 1977.
Doug B. Conners had a personal account with appellee Southwest Auto Supply, Inc. He became behind with his personal account. In October, 1976 Conners was told he no longer had credit with appellee Southwest Auto Supply until he settled his past due account. Conners wrote a $3,500 check on the partnership account and told Wayne Morehead, manager of Southwest Auto Supply, to apply the $3,500 to his past due personal account. Conners made charges on the Commercial Truck Refinishing partnership account from October 18, 1976 up to and through January 25, 1977.
Inmon alleges error in the trial court's not allowing the $3,500 check written by Conners on the partnership account to be credited to the Commercial Truck Refinishing account. Inmon further alleges he would actually have a credit of $600.00 with Southwest if the check had been credited to the partnership account rather than to Conners personal back debt.
Inmon alleges Morehead, manager of Southwest, knew there was a new partnership. Also he contends the face of the check shows it was drawn on the Commercial Truck Refinishing account and therefore was notice in and of itself the funds should be credited to the partnership only.
In Batson v. Drummond, 158 Ark. 29, 249 S.W. 547 (1923) the court held where plaintiff and defendant entered into an agreement to operate a hotel, the firm could not be charged with the expense of operation for a time preceding the formation of the partnership.
The case required an accounting between the parties to the partnership. In the case at hand there is a third party Southwest Auto Supply. We must determine whether Southwest could rely on directions of a partner to applying funds from the partnership to his personal account. If we hold Southwest accountable are we placing an undue burden on a creditor doing business with a partnership?
Ark.Stat.Ann. § 65-109 provides:
(1) Every partner is an agent of the partnership for the purpose of its business, and the act of every partner, including the execution in the partnership name of any instrument, apparently carrying on in the usual way the business of the partnership of which he is a member binds the partnership, unless the partner so acting has in fact no authority to act for the partnership in the particular matter, and the person with whom he is dealing has knowledge of the fact...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Easterling v. Weedman, CA
...during the course and in furtherance of the conspiracy. To this extent, this case is similar to that of Inmon v. Southwest Auto Supply, Inc., 268 Ark. 1140, 599 S.W.2d 420 (Ark.App.1980). That case involved a lawsuit against a man who wrote a check on a partnership account to settle a perso......
- Pulliam v. McGarity, CA